Public hearing into future of the Wimbledon greyhound stadium gets underway

The public hearing into the future of the Wimbledon greyhound stadium is set to start today as two sides go head-to-head to fight for the venue.

AFC Wimbledon and an Irish businessman keen to upgrade the venue into a top quality greyhound track are both hoping to secure permission to regenerate the site.

An independent inspector appointed by the government will consider all sides of the debate at a hearing scheduled to last for two days.

Emotions have been running high since plans to transform the historic facilities were announced last year, with supporters of greyhound racing, residents, and football fans all having their say in the ongoing saga surrounding the Plough Lane site.

A campaign group called We Want Wimbledon was set up to support Irish business magnate Paschal Taggart's plans for a £60m revamp to transform the stadium into the "Royal Ascot of dog racing."

Meanwhile, AFC Wimbledon fans were handed a manifesto of the club's ambitious plans to build a £16m stadium that they claim would allow the club to return to its spiritual home.

The Dons, who have teamed up with Galliard Homes, are hoping to return to Wimbledon, down the road from where they played between 1912 and 1991, and aim to build a 20,000 seater stadium in place of the track.

Comments (95)

I hope for the sake of the greyhounds that Taggart is unsuccessful. The reason I say that is detailed in new 155-page publication free to access on the internet: Behind the Lights, the Tote and the Non-starters.

I hope for the sake of the greyhounds that Taggart is unsuccessful. The reason I say that is detailed in new 155-page publication free to access on the internet: Behind the Lights, the Tote and the Non-starters.ZoonPolitikon

There used to be 30 greyhound tracks in London - now there are two - says all you need to know about the 'popularity' of this 'sport'. AFC Wimbledon will be much better neighbours than dogs and banger racing.

There used to be 30 greyhound tracks in London - now there are two - says all you need to know about the 'popularity' of this 'sport'. AFC Wimbledon will be much better neighbours than dogs and banger racing.Hugh Dunnit

AFC Wimbledon are owned by a couple of thousand people who make up a Trust. The vast majority are people who live in and around Merton i.e. they are the community. This is already their home. They make no profit as all proceeds from running the club go back to the club and the support of local community enterprises. They have won awards for this already. Dog racing is not sport- it's betting and profits go out of the borough. This really is 'no contest'

AFC Wimbledon are owned by a couple of thousand people who make up a Trust. The vast majority are people who live in and around Merton i.e. they are the community. This is already their home. They make no profit as all proceeds from running the club go back to the club and the support of local community enterprises. They have won awards for this already. Dog racing is not sport- it's betting and profits go out of the borough. This really is 'no contest'Merton_Boy

AFC Wimbledon are a huge part of the community. All the people behind the greyhound bid have been extremely disrespectful to AFC Wimbledon and the people of this community. They are also spreading lies about what Wimbledon have planned for the site. As far as I'm concerned we need to "Bring the Dons Home", as they have put it.

AFC Wimbledon are a huge part of the community. All the people behind the greyhound bid have been extremely disrespectful to AFC Wimbledon and the people of this community. They are also spreading lies about what Wimbledon have planned for the site. As far as I'm concerned we need to "Bring the Dons Home", as they have put it.TheWimbledonResident

I am a Merton resident, and I support the football stadium proposal. This will by far make best use of the site. The people running the Greyhound 'stadium' have shamefully allowed it to become rundown and a complete eyesore, why should they get another chance? Why do the greyhounds even have to be in Wimbledon....what do they bring to the community? AFC Wimbledon have won Government awards for their community work in Merton despite being in Kingston. Absolute no brainer.

I am a Merton resident, and I support the football stadium proposal. This will by far make best use of the site. The people running the Greyhound 'stadium' have shamefully allowed it to become rundown and a complete eyesore, why should they get another chance? Why do the greyhounds even have to be in Wimbledon....what do they bring to the community? AFC Wimbledon have won Government awards for their community work in Merton despite being in Kingston. Absolute no brainer.palmtree55

AFC Wimbledon have an excellent community involvement record. Greyhound racing is a (thankfully) dying sport, and the desperation of their camp is highlighted by the rather shameful tactics of that consortium, running down AFC Wimbledon at every turn instead of delivering a reasoned argument for their cause. In return, the Dons continue to act honourably and with integrity at every turn. The greyhound consortium has very few supporters (much like greyhound racing), and in a matter of a few years their sport won't exist. Merton Council, BRING THE DONS HOME!!!!

AFC Wimbledon have an excellent community involvement record. Greyhound racing is a (thankfully) dying sport, and the desperation of their camp is highlighted by the rather shameful tactics of that consortium, running down AFC Wimbledon at every turn instead of delivering a reasoned argument for their cause. In return, the Dons continue to act honourably and with integrity at every turn. The greyhound consortium has very few supporters (much like greyhound racing), and in a matter of a few years their sport won't exist. Merton Council, BRING THE DONS HOME!!!!nicmcj717

Royal Ascot of dog racing? I can't imagine the queen and other posh nobs in their fancy hats waging a fiver at the local dog track.

Definitely bring The Dons home. The vast majority wants this to happen and it will be far more beneficial for the community, especially the young. This Irish businessman sounds just like another Pete Winkelman who doesn't care for what the local community want.

Besides greyhound racing is a fast dwindling sport which brings nothing to the town of Merton anyway and they'll quickly let it go to rack and ruin again when very few turn up, they already have little support as it is.

AFC Wimbledon has a much brighter future ahead of them, and this future will be secured if they are allowed to go back home to Plough Lane, it was an injustice that they were forced out in the first place. AFC Wimbledon are already selling out their games in their temporary shared stadium which is outside Wimbledon and Merton, so they now need a bigger stadium to meet the demands, preferably back home.

Not to grant AFC Wimbledon Plough Lane would be another travesty and another huge mistake. Bring the Dons home.

Royal Ascot of dog racing? I can't imagine the queen and other posh nobs in their fancy hats waging a fiver at the local dog track.
Definitely bring The Dons home. The vast majority wants this to happen and it will be far more beneficial for the community, especially the young. This Irish businessman sounds just like another Pete Winkelman who doesn't care for what the local community want.
Besides greyhound racing is a fast dwindling sport which brings nothing to the town of Merton anyway and they'll quickly let it go to rack and ruin again when very few turn up, they already have little support as it is.
AFC Wimbledon has a much brighter future ahead of them, and this future will be secured if they are allowed to go back home to Plough Lane, it was an injustice that they were forced out in the first place. AFC Wimbledon are already selling out their games in their temporary shared stadium which is outside Wimbledon and Merton, so they now need a bigger stadium to meet the demands, preferably back home.
Not to grant AFC Wimbledon Plough Lane would be another travesty and another huge mistake. Bring the Dons home.Barry Lendrum

The choice is between bringing Wimbledon football home to where it began more than a century ago - or selling out to a Johnny-come-lately outsider. That's no choice at all. Bring -em home! Bring 'em home!

Roger Carroll

Bring 'Em Home!
The choice is between bringing Wimbledon football home to where it began more than a century ago - or selling out to a Johnny-come-lately outsider. That's no choice at all. Bring -em home! Bring 'em home!
Roger CarrollRoger Carroll

Good luck to AFC Wimbledon - I hope we can finally move the football club back to Wimbledon where it belongs! We have a wonderful, fan owned club with a fully committed community ethos. Come on you Dons!!!

Good luck to AFC Wimbledon - I hope we can finally move the football club back to Wimbledon where it belongs! We have a wonderful, fan owned club with a fully committed community ethos. Come on you Dons!!!RichardSW

As a long standing wimbledon supporter and a resident in merton I fully support the football club's plan. If supported it will regenerate a site that is semi derelict create jobs, homes and a community asset that will benefit all in Merton. Wimbledon's community involvement has been second to none and all that has been achieved while not having a ground in the borough and the ground in Kingston being limited in space. Bring the Dons home. it is interesting while we have shown positive options for the site Mr Taggart and his mates have descended into a round of half truths and unfounded criticism of the Galliard/Wimbledon Bid. Its time we had a home game

As a long standing wimbledon supporter and a resident in merton I fully support the football club's plan. If supported it will regenerate a site that is semi derelict create jobs, homes and a community asset that will benefit all in Merton. Wimbledon's community involvement has been second to none and all that has been achieved while not having a ground in the borough and the ground in Kingston being limited in space. Bring the Dons home. it is interesting while we have shown positive options for the site Mr Taggart and his mates have descended into a round of half truths and unfounded criticism of the Galliard/Wimbledon Bid. Its time we had a home gameseanf

al the taxi wrote:
afc Wimbledon do so much good work with the community.cant see what keeping the dogs will add to the community.greyhound really is a dying sport in England.

Approximately 450 full & part-time jobs with the greyhound stadium redevelopment...whic
h in my humble opinion is nothing to be scoffed at.

[quote][p][bold]al the taxi[/bold] wrote:
afc Wimbledon do so much good work with the community.cant see what keeping the dogs will add to the community.greyhound really is a dying sport in England.[/p][/quote]Approximately 450 full & part-time jobs with the greyhound stadium redevelopment...whic
h in my humble opinion is nothing to be scoffed at.ElizabethHay

I have been local to Wimbledon all my life. I have been to the greyhound stadium a handful of times. It was always a grungy experience. I went to Plough Lane to watch Wimbledon hundreds of times. It was always an amazing experience. The club and in particular now, AFC Wimbledon have a wonderful ethos that would bring so much more to that site than an outdated marginalised, unsupported sport. What have the greyhounds brought to the community/town/local residents?? BRING THE DONS BACK HOME. Bring a wonderful football community and legacy back home. Bring some passion, hope and spirit back to that part of our borough.

I have been local to Wimbledon all my life. I have been to the greyhound stadium a handful of times. It was always a grungy experience. I went to Plough Lane to watch Wimbledon hundreds of times. It was always an amazing experience. The club and in particular now, AFC Wimbledon have a wonderful ethos that would bring so much more to that site than an outdated marginalised, unsupported sport. What have the greyhounds brought to the community/town/local residents?? BRING THE DONS BACK HOME. Bring a wonderful football community and legacy back home. Bring some passion, hope and spirit back to that part of our borough.aarrrgghhhh

This debate is not about football or dogs it is about what's best for a run down site in Merton.

I have lived in Merton all my life and I used to watch Wimbledon play at Plough Lane. The Wimbledon fans were stitched up by numerous owners, a council who lifted the covenant allowing the football ground to be sold to Safeway and football authorities who franchised their club to Milton Keynes.

If the dogs was a successful business entity this debate wouldn't even be happening. It isn't.

Which of the two parties does the most for the community in Merton?

I'm biased but AFC Wimbledon have been truly remarkable in galvanising support through volunteers and local businesses to create a hugely important community asset. This is the big society in action. People from all backgrounds have pitched in and created a most beautiful and wondrous example of community spirit.

The only way to reward this is to allow the football club to come home and continue its great work.

Lets just do the right thing this time.

This debate is not about football or dogs it is about what's best for a run down site in Merton.
I have lived in Merton all my life and I used to watch Wimbledon play at Plough Lane. The Wimbledon fans were stitched up by numerous owners, a council who lifted the covenant allowing the football ground to be sold to Safeway and football authorities who franchised their club to Milton Keynes.
If the dogs was a successful business entity this debate wouldn't even be happening. It isn't.
Which of the two parties does the most for the community in Merton?
I'm biased but AFC Wimbledon have been truly remarkable in galvanising support through volunteers and local businesses to create a hugely important community asset. This is the big society in action. People from all backgrounds have pitched in and created a most beautiful and wondrous example of community spirit.
The only way to reward this is to allow the football club to come home and continue its great work.
Lets just do the right thing this time.mattlowndes

Brighton used to play at the Withdean which had a 400m running track around the edge. Ok the stadium wasn't the best in the land but Wimbledon won't generate enough revune in league 2 to justify a 20,000 seater stadium and single use owners of the stadium.. Especially when they are just about filling Kingsmeadow.

I think it would be more realistic if they were league 1 / Championship or had some more cash injected from the owners. If they purchased the stadium they could at least then rent it out for Greyhound Racing..

Why can't there be both ?
Brighton used to play at the Withdean which had a 400m running track around the edge. Ok the stadium wasn't the best in the land but Wimbledon won't generate enough revune in league 2 to justify a 20,000 seater stadium and single use owners of the stadium.. Especially when they are just about filling Kingsmeadow.
I think it would be more realistic if they were league 1 / Championship or had some more cash injected from the owners. If they purchased the stadium they could at least then rent it out for Greyhound Racing..Greenarmy12

Wimbledon are not submitting plans for a 20,000 seat stadium, but an 11,000 seat one which can be increased to 20,000 if necessary. And they are filling Kingsmeadow regularly. Many people are put off going there due to space issues. Wimbledon can only offer around 800 away tickets per game. There are several clubs who could bring many more away fans than this.
Also, I defy anyone to read the following link and still say they support greyhound racing...

http://www.animal-ri
ghts-action.com/grey
hound-dogs.html

Wimbledon are not submitting plans for a 20,000 seat stadium, but an 11,000 seat one which can be increased to 20,000 if necessary. And they are filling Kingsmeadow regularly. Many people are put off going there due to space issues. Wimbledon can only offer around 800 away tickets per game. There are several clubs who could bring many more away fans than this.
Also, I defy anyone to read the following link and still say they support greyhound racing...
http://www.animal-ri
ghts-action.com/grey
hound-dogs.htmlBushmonkey

So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside

So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outsideChuckie715

Chuckie715 wrote:
So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside

Perhaps the stock car people should get together with Taggart and look to build a new greyhound/stock car venue in a location that would be accessible for a wider range of Londoners, maybe in Nine Elms or similar? If both of those parties are talking of themselves as a national attraction, they have the flexibility to adjust their location slightly and capitalise on that appeal, whereas AFC Wimbledon as a community grounded and owned club is somewhat more geographically tied.

[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside[/p][/quote]Perhaps the stock car people should get together with Taggart and look to build a new greyhound/stock car venue in a location that would be accessible for a wider range of Londoners, maybe in Nine Elms or similar? If both of those parties are talking of themselves as a national attraction, they have the flexibility to adjust their location slightly and capitalise on that appeal, whereas AFC Wimbledon as a community grounded and owned club is somewhat more geographically tied.rob_c

al the taxi wrote:
afc Wimbledon do so much good work with the community.cant see what keeping the dogs will add to the community.greyhound really is a dying sport in England.

Approximately 450 full &amp; part-time jobs with the greyhound stadium redevelopment...whic

h in my humble opinion is nothing to be scoffed at.

450 seems a slightly high estimate, but of course a new football stadium would also bring plenty of new jobs, too.

[quote][p][bold]ElizabethHay[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]al the taxi[/bold] wrote:
afc Wimbledon do so much good work with the community.cant see what keeping the dogs will add to the community.greyhound really is a dying sport in England.[/p][/quote]Approximately 450 full & part-time jobs with the greyhound stadium redevelopment...whic
h in my humble opinion is nothing to be scoffed at.[/p][/quote]450 seems a slightly high estimate, but of course a new football stadium would also bring plenty of new jobs, too.rob_c

Chuckie715 wrote:
So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside

Well if you don't mind me saying but that's a bit of a self-serving attitude. You'd even support a cruel sport for it. The stockcar lot can have a new stadium anywhere. You're not geographically tied like AFC are..

You're not a local who clearly cannot comprehend why locals would want their own football club back home where they belong over stockcar racing, It might be hard to grasp, but the locals want their football team back in their town. No outsiders who don't really care for the town like the locals do should ever be able to dictate otherwise,

Maybe you're not a fan of football, or at least not a fan of supporting your local club. But stock car racing is still by far a less popular sport, a sport which can be relocated anywhere in London as they're not geographically tied to representing a town like a football club is, same with that dying greyhound racing sport. AFC Wimbledon are tied to just their own town, no other town will do as that won't work out longterm and MK Franchise is proof of that as they only represent their own town and not Wimbledon. Again, Wimbledon locals need their club back more than stockcar or greyhound racing, 2 minority sports which can move anywhere.

AFC need a bigger stadium to accommodate more home and away fans as their present club has gotten too small for them, and AFC were never meant to stay outside their borough. As they climb the league they will be able to expand their stadium, where they are now there is no room for expansion. Right now the growth of AFC are limited to their tiny stadium until they can expand back home like every other club.

The final decision should be based on needs most important, what is best for the local community and what will be the most profitable. Football is the biggest sport in Britain, stock car and greyhound racing are just minority sports. Clearly football and AFC Wimbledon wins hands down.

Wimbledon lost their club before, it was a football scandal which still tarnishes the beautiful game to this day. A return to Plough Lane is long overdue.

[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside[/p][/quote]Well if you don't mind me saying but that's a bit of a self-serving attitude. You'd even support a cruel sport for it. The stockcar lot can have a new stadium anywhere. You're not geographically tied like AFC are..
You're not a local who clearly cannot comprehend why locals would want their own football club back home where they belong over stockcar racing, It might be hard to grasp, but the locals want their football team back in their town. No outsiders who don't really care for the town like the locals do should ever be able to dictate otherwise,
Maybe you're not a fan of football, or at least not a fan of supporting your local club. But stock car racing is still by far a less popular sport, a sport which can be relocated anywhere in London as they're not geographically tied to representing a town like a football club is, same with that dying greyhound racing sport. AFC Wimbledon are tied to just their own town, no other town will do as that won't work out longterm and MK Franchise is proof of that as they only represent their own town and not Wimbledon. Again, Wimbledon locals need their club back more than stockcar or greyhound racing, 2 minority sports which can move anywhere.
AFC need a bigger stadium to accommodate more home and away fans as their present club has gotten too small for them, and AFC were never meant to stay outside their borough. As they climb the league they will be able to expand their stadium, where they are now there is no room for expansion. Right now the growth of AFC are limited to their tiny stadium until they can expand back home like every other club.
The final decision should be based on needs most important, what is best for the local community and what will be the most profitable. Football is the biggest sport in Britain, stock car and greyhound racing are just minority sports. Clearly football and AFC Wimbledon wins hands down.
Wimbledon lost their club before, it was a football scandal which still tarnishes the beautiful game to this day. A return to Plough Lane is long overdue.Barry Lendrum

Chuckie715 wrote: So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside

Well if you don't mind me saying but that's a bit of a self-serving attitude. You'd even support a cruel sport for it. The stockcar lot can have a new stadium anywhere. You're not geographically tied like AFC are.. You're not a local who clearly cannot comprehend why locals would want their own football club back home where they belong over stockcar racing, It might be hard to grasp, but the locals want their football team back in their town. No outsiders who don't really care for the town like the locals do should ever be able to dictate otherwise, Maybe you're not a fan of football, or at least not a fan of supporting your local club. But stock car racing is still by far a less popular sport, a sport which can be relocated anywhere in London as they're not geographically tied to representing a town like a football club is, same with that dying greyhound racing sport. AFC Wimbledon are tied to just their own town, no other town will do as that won't work out longterm and MK Franchise is proof of that as they only represent their own town and not Wimbledon. Again, Wimbledon locals need their club back more than stockcar or greyhound racing, 2 minority sports which can move anywhere. AFC need a bigger stadium to accommodate more home and away fans as their present club has gotten too small for them, and AFC were never meant to stay outside their borough. As they climb the league they will be able to expand their stadium, where they are now there is no room for expansion. Right now the growth of AFC are limited to their tiny stadium until they can expand back home like every other club. The final decision should be based on needs most important, what is best for the local community and what will be the most profitable. Football is the biggest sport in Britain, stock car and greyhound racing are just minority sports. Clearly football and AFC Wimbledon wins hands down. Wimbledon lost their club before, it was a football scandal which still tarnishes the beautiful game to this day. A return to Plough Lane is long overdue.

Im not trying to dictate anything inor am i against afc wimbledon wanting to return to the local area i can still remember you being wimbledon fc, stock cars may not be geographically tied like a football club, but we still have our share of history within those walls and thats what im trying to prevent our sport losing. But i still dont see why a compromise cant be made between afc and stock car promoters so that you come home where you started near enough, and we still have somewhere our fixture list can still say wimbledon thats all. Plus if we lease the stadium as we do now then afc get a bit extra revenue we get a track

[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote: So then where does that leave us.... The stockcar lot? Plough lane has been our biggest and best venue for atleast half a century .yes dogs are a dying sport and personally never been my cup of tea ,but ours is not dying by any means. And anyone who thinks were all chavs pikeys and general undesireables, come to a meeting and see for yourself theres young, old, and several walks of life that come to see our sport live, is its a social family evening out . That is the only reason ive been behind mr taggart as the dons plans dont include a stockcar track for whatever reason , its perfectly doable look at cowdenbeath fc i just dont see what the locals have against us staying there and building a track round the outside[/p][/quote]Well if you don't mind me saying but that's a bit of a self-serving attitude. You'd even support a cruel sport for it. The stockcar lot can have a new stadium anywhere. You're not geographically tied like AFC are.. You're not a local who clearly cannot comprehend why locals would want their own football club back home where they belong over stockcar racing, It might be hard to grasp, but the locals want their football team back in their town. No outsiders who don't really care for the town like the locals do should ever be able to dictate otherwise, Maybe you're not a fan of football, or at least not a fan of supporting your local club. But stock car racing is still by far a less popular sport, a sport which can be relocated anywhere in London as they're not geographically tied to representing a town like a football club is, same with that dying greyhound racing sport. AFC Wimbledon are tied to just their own town, no other town will do as that won't work out longterm and MK Franchise is proof of that as they only represent their own town and not Wimbledon. Again, Wimbledon locals need their club back more than stockcar or greyhound racing, 2 minority sports which can move anywhere. AFC need a bigger stadium to accommodate more home and away fans as their present club has gotten too small for them, and AFC were never meant to stay outside their borough. As they climb the league they will be able to expand their stadium, where they are now there is no room for expansion. Right now the growth of AFC are limited to their tiny stadium until they can expand back home like every other club. The final decision should be based on needs most important, what is best for the local community and what will be the most profitable. Football is the biggest sport in Britain, stock car and greyhound racing are just minority sports. Clearly football and AFC Wimbledon wins hands down. Wimbledon lost their club before, it was a football scandal which still tarnishes the beautiful game to this day. A return to Plough Lane is long overdue.[/p][/quote]Im not trying to dictate anything inor am i against afc wimbledon wanting to return to the local area i can still remember you being wimbledon fc, stock cars may not be geographically tied like a football club, but we still have our share of history within those walls and thats what im trying to prevent our sport losing. But i still dont see why a compromise cant be made between afc and stock car promoters so that you come home where you started near enough, and we still have somewhere our fixture list can still say wimbledon thats all. Plus if we lease the stadium as we do now then afc get a bit extra revenue we get a trackChuckie715

It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.

It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.Bushmonkey

Bushmonkey wrote:
It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.

Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different

[quote][p][bold]Bushmonkey[/bold] wrote:
It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.[/p][/quote]Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been differentChuckie715

Bushmonkey wrote:
It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.

Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different

I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about "world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.

[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Bushmonkey[/bold] wrote:
It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.[/p][/quote]Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different[/p][/quote]I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about "world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.Tax_Bob

Really sorry Chuckie715, don't believe everything that business man says. His plans change like the wind. He's telling the press/ and or WPRA (who 'represent' the locals, that he no longer has plans for the stock car racing. Not sure I can post a link to an external publication but there is a story in the Racing Post 5 days ago.

On it, Iain Simpson, chairman of the Association, says: “There are two developers who have made proposals. Paschal Taggart, a well-known personality in Irish greyhound circles, who wishes to build a new greyhound stadium which would accommodate a maximum of 4,500 spectators, 400 residential units and a supermarket. They have indicated that they would no longer have stock car racing.

Really sorry Chuckie715, don't believe everything that business man says. His plans change like the wind. He's telling the press/ and or WPRA (who 'represent' the locals, that he no longer has plans for the stock car racing. Not sure I can post a link to an external publication but there is a story in the Racing Post 5 days ago.
On it, Iain Simpson, chairman of the Association, says: “There are two developers who have made proposals. Paschal Taggart, a well-known personality in Irish greyhound circles, who wishes to build a new greyhound stadium which would accommodate a maximum of 4,500 spectators, 400 residential units and a supermarket. They have indicated that they would no longer have stock car racing.
http://www.racingpos
t.com/news/greyhound
s/derby-would-stay-a
t-plough-lane-says-g
ra-s-feltham/1594932
/yojimbo

Bushmonkey wrote: It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.

Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different

I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about &quot;world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.

Ive not been made aware of these proposals obviously weve still got the old ones, if that is the case then i hope football returns , and its not turned into somd yuppies playground . Theres also by my reconing no mention of one in the dons plans either . So either way stockcars lose out because taggart crossed us and afc want it all to themselves .

[quote][p][bold]Tax_Bob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bushmonkey[/bold] wrote: It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.[/p][/quote]Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different[/p][/quote]I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about "world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.[/p][/quote]Ive not been made aware of these proposals obviously weve still got the old ones, if that is the case then i hope football returns , and its not turned into somd yuppies playground . Theres also by my reconing no mention of one in the dons plans either . So either way stockcars lose out because taggart crossed us and afc want it all to themselves .Chuckie715

Bushmonkey wrote: It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.

Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different

I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about &quot;world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.

Ive not been made aware of these proposals obviously weve still got the old ones, if that is the case then i hope football returns , and its not turned into somd yuppies playground . Theres also by my reconing no mention of one in the dons plans either . So either way stockcars lose out because taggart crossed us and afc want it all to themselves .

Proposals are on the Merton council website: http://www.merton.go
v.uk/environment/pla
nning/planningpolicy
/ldf/sites_policies_
plan/examination-sit
es_and_policies_and_
policies_map__.htm
All I can add around the stockcar issue is that it appears that only one of the parties (i.e. AFCW) has been honest in that they never said stockcars would be included and have consistently kept that line.

[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Tax_Bob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bushmonkey[/bold] wrote: It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.[/p][/quote]Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different[/p][/quote]I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about "world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.[/p][/quote]Ive not been made aware of these proposals obviously weve still got the old ones, if that is the case then i hope football returns , and its not turned into somd yuppies playground . Theres also by my reconing no mention of one in the dons plans either . So either way stockcars lose out because taggart crossed us and afc want it all to themselves .[/p][/quote]Proposals are on the Merton council website: http://www.merton.go
v.uk/environment/pla
nning/planningpolicy
/ldf/sites_policies_
plan/examination-sit
es_and_policies_and_
policies_map__.htm
All I can add around the stockcar issue is that it appears that only one of the parties (i.e. AFCW) has been honest in that they never said stockcars would be included and have consistently kept that line.Tax_Bob

yojimbo wrote:
Really sorry Chuckie715, don't believe everything that business man says. His plans change like the wind. He's telling the press/ and or WPRA (who 'represent' the locals, that he no longer has plans for the stock car racing. Not sure I can post a link to an external publication but there is a story in the Racing Post 5 days ago.

On it, Iain Simpson, chairman of the Association, says: “There are two developers who have made proposals. Paschal Taggart, a well-known personality in Irish greyhound circles, who wishes to build a new greyhound stadium which would accommodate a maximum of 4,500 spectators, 400 residential units and a supermarket. They have indicated that they would no longer have stock car racing.

http://www.racingpos

t.com/news/greyhound

s/derby-would-stay-a

t-plough-lane-says-g

ra-s-feltham/1594932

/

It also appears the Irish government does not believe everything Mr Taggart says either, especially in relation to finances and greyhound doping cover-ups: http://www.irishexam
iner.com/archives/20
07/1102/ireland/reve
aled-huge-cost-over-
runs-at-bord-na-gcon
-46912.html

[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
Really sorry Chuckie715, don't believe everything that business man says. His plans change like the wind. He's telling the press/ and or WPRA (who 'represent' the locals, that he no longer has plans for the stock car racing. Not sure I can post a link to an external publication but there is a story in the Racing Post 5 days ago.
On it, Iain Simpson, chairman of the Association, says: “There are two developers who have made proposals. Paschal Taggart, a well-known personality in Irish greyhound circles, who wishes to build a new greyhound stadium which would accommodate a maximum of 4,500 spectators, 400 residential units and a supermarket. They have indicated that they would no longer have stock car racing.
http://www.racingpos
t.com/news/greyhound
s/derby-would-stay-a
t-plough-lane-says-g
ra-s-feltham/1594932
/[/p][/quote]It also appears the Irish government does not believe everything Mr Taggart says either, especially in relation to finances and greyhound doping cover-ups: http://www.irishexam
iner.com/archives/20
07/1102/ireland/reve
aled-huge-cost-over-
runs-at-bord-na-gcon
-46912.htmlTax_Bob

Bushmonkey wrote: It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.

Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different

I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about &quot;world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.

Ive not been made aware of these proposals obviously weve still got the old ones, if that is the case then i hope football returns , and its not turned into somd yuppies playground . Theres also by my reconing no mention of one in the dons plans either . So either way stockcars lose out because taggart crossed us and afc want it all to themselves .

Proposals are on the Merton council website: http://www.merton.go v.uk/environment/pla nning/planningpolicy /ldf/sites_policies_ plan/examination-sit es_and_policies_and_ policies_map__.htm All I can add around the stockcar issue is that it appears that only one of the parties (i.e. AFCW) has been honest in that they never said stockcars would be included and have consistently kept that line.

That they have and no one can say otherwise. it just peeves me weve now lost out cos theres no room anymore as no one would work with us, even though the answer was staring us all in the face with cowdenbeath. You'd have thought with everything nowadays being driven by cost profit and saving that both partys would have looked into us as someone to help with costs and or bring extra revenue. Dont belive me then come down on 9th february and see how much we can fill with whats left open plus our entry fee is about the same as id imagine a football match is

[quote][p][bold]Tax_Bob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tax_Bob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bushmonkey[/bold] wrote: It should also be pointed out that Wimbledon Football Club played on the greyhound stadium site before moving to Plough Lane. So there is history of football on the site long before dog racing.[/p][/quote]Ok you learn something new everyday, so why not put the ground there with a track outside? Ive asked that from the off even at the current stadium, i can understand why people are against greyhounds as most of us are too but cant understand what everyone has against us? and no one has come up with a reasonable non malicious answer to that. Only explanation ive seen anywhere is the idea were all just chavs and pikeys, a lot of drivers are football fans as well so a lot of us want the dons back. Ive said it before ill say it again we have nothing against the dons the sole reason taggart won favour with us is due to the fact his plans include a stockcar track, call it self serving call it what you like but thats why , had afc included plans for a track i think it would have been different[/p][/quote]I may have missed something, but having looked through the Taggart proposal, there is no mention of stock cars and the design images only show a greyhound track. The blurb associated with all the greyhound proposals talk about "world class" greyhounds and "first class" squash (although the football proposals also include the squash club so that is a moot point) but no mention of motorsports.[/p][/quote]Ive not been made aware of these proposals obviously weve still got the old ones, if that is the case then i hope football returns , and its not turned into somd yuppies playground . Theres also by my reconing no mention of one in the dons plans either . So either way stockcars lose out because taggart crossed us and afc want it all to themselves .[/p][/quote]Proposals are on the Merton council website: http://www.merton.go v.uk/environment/pla nning/planningpolicy /ldf/sites_policies_ plan/examination-sit es_and_policies_and_ policies_map__.htm All I can add around the stockcar issue is that it appears that only one of the parties (i.e. AFCW) has been honest in that they never said stockcars would be included and have consistently kept that line.[/p][/quote]That they have and no one can say otherwise. it just peeves me weve now lost out cos theres no room anymore as no one would work with us, even though the answer was staring us all in the face with cowdenbeath. You'd have thought with everything nowadays being driven by cost profit and saving that both partys would have looked into us as someone to help with costs and or bring extra revenue. Dont belive me then come down on 9th february and see how much we can fill with whats left open plus our entry fee is about the same as id imagine a football match isChuckie715

Banger racing is being stitched up just as the original Wimbledon FC was. Forget what you think about dog racing, the fact is that oval racing is being deliberately overlooked in the wider argument.
Stock car / Banger racing is very popular and growing, but due to the small margins in the sport the few promoters remaining don't have the money behind them that football does and so cannot simply up sticks and move to a new area due to all the costs that would incur. People who suggest a new home in London not only ignore the impossible costs of land but also the slim chance of being granted planning etc etc.
Frankly it is shameful that a club who promotes it's community values is quite happy to sell another sport down the river knowing full well the consequences are irreversible for us banger fans. Sad thing is that the existing stadium was offered for sharing between the two sports years ago.

Banger racing is being stitched up just as the original Wimbledon FC was. Forget what you think about dog racing, the fact is that oval racing is being deliberately overlooked in the wider argument.
Stock car / Banger racing is very popular and growing, but due to the small margins in the sport the few promoters remaining don't have the money behind them that football does and so cannot simply up sticks and move to a new area due to all the costs that would incur. People who suggest a new home in London not only ignore the impossible costs of land but also the slim chance of being granted planning etc etc.
Frankly it is shameful that a club who promotes it's community values is quite happy to sell another sport down the river knowing full well the consequences are irreversible for us banger fans. Sad thing is that the existing stadium was offered for sharing between the two sports years ago.Ilusions

co2 wrote:
Greyhound racing and banger racing pull more people through the gates in a year than afc wimbledon will for 25 odd fixtures.

Indeed but unfortunately this has never been a fair or balanced debate from the start as the council have been more than vocal in supporting the football bid. Shameful way to leave banger racing fans with no London address which will not be reversed as the costs are impossible.
Shame on Merton council.

[quote][p][bold]co2[/bold] wrote:
Greyhound racing and banger racing pull more people through the gates in a year than afc wimbledon will for 25 odd fixtures.[/p][/quote]Indeed but unfortunately this has never been a fair or balanced debate from the start as the council have been more than vocal in supporting the football bid. Shameful way to leave banger racing fans with no London address which will not be reversed as the costs are impossible.
Shame on Merton council.Ilusions

3 people from the UK voting. The rest are from Ireland. The doggers have got their friends and family to vote for them.

3 days ago, before this poll became aware to them, it was 90% to 10%. Funny how it has changed.

Play fair doggers.

http://www.greyhound
-data.com/knowledge.
php?b=4&note=983196&
order=&x=3&z=3yXW_Z
3 people from the UK voting. The rest are from Ireland. The doggers have got their friends and family to vote for them.
3 days ago, before this poll became aware to them, it was 90% to 10%. Funny how it has changed.
Play fair doggers.Raging Womble

You get more than 4600 now and will more than the 11000 that will fill a new stadium. I doubt it.

Come down on the 9th and find out then . last years world final had at least 15 000 at ipswich used to get packed out too at plough lane when it was there only moved it as most of it was deemed unsafe

[quote][p][bold]Hugh Dunnit[/bold] wrote:
co2 says...
Crowds for the banger racing are bigger than afc wimbledon get.
You get more than 4600 now and will more than the 11000 that will fill a new stadium. I doubt it.[/p][/quote]Come down on the 9th and find out then . last years world final had at least 15 000 at ipswich used to get packed out too at plough lane when it was there only moved it as most of it was deemed unsafeChuckie715

I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the debate regarding the use of Wimbledon Stadium as a venue for stock car racing. Wimbledon Stadium has shared the facility for greyhounds, stock cars and once upon a time speedway for many years. Stock car racing has brought enjoyment to many thousands of people and used to be held on a Saturday night, a day which may be preferable for local residents rather than a Sunday night due to the noise issue although I would like to point out that the racing is only held during the winter months and not at a time when people might be out in their gardens or have their windows open. The racing itself is run by a professional organisation, the drivers and supporters conduct themselves with the utmost decorum which unfortunately cannot always be said about supporters of other sports. Stock car racing is not only about people going to a venue to watch cars racing around a track as it is also a way of forming lifelong friendships, raising money for charity and many of the drivers have had previous generations of their family involved in the sport. It is a sport that young and old can enjoy and participate in. A number of sporting facilities within London have vanished over the years to make way for housing developments. To lose Wimbledon as a venue for greyhounds, stock cars and hopefully one day speedway once again would be a travesty.

I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the debate regarding the use of Wimbledon Stadium as a venue for stock car racing. Wimbledon Stadium has shared the facility for greyhounds, stock cars and once upon a time speedway for many years. Stock car racing has brought enjoyment to many thousands of people and used to be held on a Saturday night, a day which may be preferable for local residents rather than a Sunday night due to the noise issue although I would like to point out that the racing is only held during the winter months and not at a time when people might be out in their gardens or have their windows open. The racing itself is run by a professional organisation, the drivers and supporters conduct themselves with the utmost decorum which unfortunately cannot always be said about supporters of other sports. Stock car racing is not only about people going to a venue to watch cars racing around a track as it is also a way of forming lifelong friendships, raising money for charity and many of the drivers have had previous generations of their family involved in the sport. It is a sport that young and old can enjoy and participate in. A number of sporting facilities within London have vanished over the years to make way for housing developments. To lose Wimbledon as a venue for greyhounds, stock cars and hopefully one day speedway once again would be a travesty.jgra58

3 people from the UK voting. The rest are from Ireland. The doggers have got their friends and family to vote for them.

3 days ago, before this poll became aware to them, it was 90% to 10%. Funny how it has changed.

Play fair doggers.

I think maybe your polling difference over the last 24hrs reflect what the top 3 news stories are on these news pages are I.e the stock car family and community

[quote][p][bold]Raging Womble[/bold] wrote:
http://www.greyhound
-data.com/knowledge.
php?b=4¬e=983196&am
p;
order=&x=3&z
=3yXW_Z
3 people from the UK voting. The rest are from Ireland. The doggers have got their friends and family to vote for them.
3 days ago, before this poll became aware to them, it was 90% to 10%. Funny how it has changed.
Play fair doggers.[/p][/quote]I think maybe your polling difference over the last 24hrs reflect what the top 3 news stories are on these news pages are I.e the stock car family and communityPGRAY125

Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.

They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.

Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.
They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.Barry Lendrum

Funny how AFC Wimbledon led the entire way right until the final day, then suddenly a spurge of people came and voted for the outsiders.

This final poll doesn't reflect the feelings of the people of Wimbledon, like the greyhound and stockcar lot don't represent the people of Wimbledon either. AFC Wimbledon are in bigger danger of disappearing if they can't go home. The whole football community apart from MK want Wimbledon to return.

AFC Wimbledon will draw in far bigger crowds as they continue to grow. Wimbledon need a football club more than stockcar or dog racing, they just cannot survive indefinite outside Wimbledon whereas they can. Football is a more family friendly sport, and the biggest sport in the UK. It's a no-brainer.

It would not surprise me if they roped the MK scummers into voting against AFC, it's an obvious tactic. This final blatantly rigged result should not prejudice the outcome of the decision.

The poll has been clearly rigged making it null and void.
Funny how AFC Wimbledon led the entire way right until the final day, then suddenly a spurge of people came and voted for the outsiders.
This final poll doesn't reflect the feelings of the people of Wimbledon, like the greyhound and stockcar lot don't represent the people of Wimbledon either. AFC Wimbledon are in bigger danger of disappearing if they can't go home. The whole football community apart from MK want Wimbledon to return.
AFC Wimbledon will draw in far bigger crowds as they continue to grow. Wimbledon need a football club more than stockcar or dog racing, they just cannot survive indefinite outside Wimbledon whereas they can. Football is a more family friendly sport, and the biggest sport in the UK. It's a no-brainer.
It would not surprise me if they roped the MK scummers into voting against AFC, it's an obvious tactic. This final blatantly rigged result should not prejudice the outcome of the decision.Barry Lendrum

3 people from the UK voting. The rest are from Ireland. The doggers have got their friends and family to vote for them.

3 days ago, before this poll became aware to them, it was 90% to 10%. Funny how it has changed.

Play fair doggers.

I live in London & have voted to keep the greyhound racing in Wimbledon. I think it is highly unlikely if not impossible that I represent 33% of the entire UK population who voted in favour of keeping the current site in Wimbledon as a greyhound track.
It is probably as likely as being 1 of 3 people on the District line train to Upminster at 8am on a Monday morning.
If this is your interpretation of statistics perhaps it's in your best interest to avoid a punt at the dog racing if & hopefully when the stadium gets redeveloped!

[quote][p][bold]Raging Womble[/bold] wrote:
http://www.greyhound
-data.com/knowledge.
php?b=4¬e=983196&am
p;
order=&x=3&z
=3yXW_Z
3 people from the UK voting. The rest are from Ireland. The doggers have got their friends and family to vote for them.
3 days ago, before this poll became aware to them, it was 90% to 10%. Funny how it has changed.
Play fair doggers.[/p][/quote]I live in London & have voted to keep the greyhound racing in Wimbledon. I think it is highly unlikely if not impossible that I represent 33% of the entire UK population who voted in favour of keeping the current site in Wimbledon as a greyhound track.
It is probably as likely as being 1 of 3 people on the District line train to Upminster at 8am on a Monday morning.
If this is your interpretation of statistics perhaps it's in your best interest to avoid a punt at the dog racing if & hopefully when the stadium gets redeveloped!ElizabethHay

Barry Lendrum wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.

They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.

the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.

[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.
They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.[/p][/quote]the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.winningallthetime

Barry Lendrum wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.

They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.

the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.

Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.

Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.

Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?

AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..

[quote][p][bold]winningallthetime[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.
They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.[/p][/quote]the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.[/p][/quote]Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.
Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.
Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?
AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..Barry Lendrum

Barry Lendrum wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.

They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.

the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.

Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.

Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.

Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?

AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..

im not a football fan you are right neither am i greyhound racing but i shouldn't have to justify my self to you and it doesn't change the fact the vast majority of us in Wimbledon (not the few afc Wimbledon fans of course) rather keep the dog track than have a football stadium which will bring a lot of trouble with it such as drunk football hooligans and anti social behaviour and for you to say it will be family friendly environment you must be having a laugh we all know what goes on in football stadiums racism towards players abuse antisocial behaviour the list goes on

[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]winningallthetime[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.
They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.[/p][/quote]the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.[/p][/quote]Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.
Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.
Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?
AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..[/p][/quote]im not a football fan you are right neither am i greyhound racing but i shouldn't have to justify my self to you and it doesn't change the fact the vast majority of us in Wimbledon (not the few afc Wimbledon fans of course) rather keep the dog track than have a football stadium which will bring a lot of trouble with it such as drunk football hooligans and anti social behaviour and for you to say it will be family friendly environment you must be having a laugh we all know what goes on in football stadiums racism towards players abuse antisocial behaviour the list goes onwinningallthetime

Barry Lendrum wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.

They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.

the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.

Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.

Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.

Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?

AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..

im not a football fan you are right neither am i greyhound racing but i shouldn't have to justify my self to you and it doesn't change the fact the vast majority of us in Wimbledon (not the few afc Wimbledon fans of course) rather keep the dog track than have a football stadium which will bring a lot of trouble with it such as drunk football hooligans and anti social behaviour and for you to say it will be family friendly environment you must be having a laugh we all know what goes on in football stadiums racism towards players abuse antisocial behaviour the list goes on

What are you some poshnob tennis fan or just lying through your teeth?

I will go for the latter, you're probably a stockcar racing fan. This is desperation from you, I don't believe you speak on behalf of the majority of locals. And yes you do have to justify your opinion. You can not win an argument without any justification.

I say you do have to justify yourself with your stereotypical views on football fans because let us be clear on this, AFC Wimbledon and Wimbledon FC do NOT have any racism or hooligan problems. This is desperation on your part. I go to the games at Kingsmeadow and have never witnessed these problems you believe with no substantiation that goes on. I can tell you that these problems do NOT exist.

As I said before, you are quite obviously underhanded and I doubt your sincerity about being a local.

[quote][p][bold]winningallthetime[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]winningallthetime[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.
They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.[/p][/quote]the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.[/p][/quote]Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.
Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.
Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?
AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..[/p][/quote]im not a football fan you are right neither am i greyhound racing but i shouldn't have to justify my self to you and it doesn't change the fact the vast majority of us in Wimbledon (not the few afc Wimbledon fans of course) rather keep the dog track than have a football stadium which will bring a lot of trouble with it such as drunk football hooligans and anti social behaviour and for you to say it will be family friendly environment you must be having a laugh we all know what goes on in football stadiums racism towards players abuse antisocial behaviour the list goes on[/p][/quote]What are you some poshnob tennis fan or just lying through your teeth?
I will go for the latter, you're probably a stockcar racing fan. This is desperation from you, I don't believe you speak on behalf of the majority of locals. And yes you do have to justify your opinion. You can not win an argument without any justification.
I say you do have to justify yourself with your stereotypical views on football fans because let us be clear on this, AFC Wimbledon and Wimbledon FC do NOT have any racism or hooligan problems. This is desperation on your part. I go to the games at Kingsmeadow and have never witnessed these problems you believe with no substantiation that goes on. I can tell you that these problems do NOT exist.
As I said before, you are quite obviously underhanded and I doubt your sincerity about being a local.Barry Lendrum

Firstly we never let anything just go to rack and ruin. Fans pay there entrance, the promoter pays x amount to lease it from the grounds owners and they obviously didnt spend a penny of that on maintaining the place. So dont blame us or the dogs blame them.
Secondly if you think its that easy to build a track somewhere just like that, go for it by all means. Last time we did that with aldershot it took near on 20 years to find a suitable venue for a track to fit and close enough to the old one to be able to still call it aldershot, and raise the funds needed to, and build it . And as weve been there so long i feel we are geographicly tied to there as its always been known as wimbledon , had it been known as the london stadium then yes we could put it anywhere but its not . Also you cant contest a london championship in the middle of hampshire it doesnt work, just because you got tucked up years ago doesnt justify you doing it to us . And what hasnt helped from the start is the blatant one sidedness and narrow mindedness of merton council we want that so sod everything else ,so we were effectively buried before this hearing was even thought of. And the fact that a groundshare was offered previously but the football team turned there noses up at it and behaved like spoilt toddlers... I want it all for us its mine not yours im not sharing. Apologies if its offended some but its true, us and dogs have lost out because you wont share

Firstly we never let anything just go to rack and ruin. Fans pay there entrance, the promoter pays x amount to lease it from the grounds owners and they obviously didnt spend a penny of that on maintaining the place. So dont blame us or the dogs blame them.
Secondly if you think its that easy to build a track somewhere just like that, go for it by all means. Last time we did that with aldershot it took near on 20 years to find a suitable venue for a track to fit and close enough to the old one to be able to still call it aldershot, and raise the funds needed to, and build it . And as weve been there so long i feel we are geographicly tied to there as its always been known as wimbledon , had it been known as the london stadium then yes we could put it anywhere but its not . Also you cant contest a london championship in the middle of hampshire it doesnt work, just because you got tucked up years ago doesnt justify you doing it to us . And what hasnt helped from the start is the blatant one sidedness and narrow mindedness of merton council we want that so sod everything else ,so we were effectively buried before this hearing was even thought of. And the fact that a groundshare was offered previously but the football team turned there noses up at it and behaved like spoilt toddlers... I want it all for us its mine not yours im not sharing. Apologies if its offended some but its true, us and dogs have lost out because you wont shareChuckie715

I'm afraid I have to say speaking as a stock car racer that I find you anti racing protesters selfish inconsiderate and immoral. What justification can you have for the feeling it's your right to just evict our sport to make way for yours. I tell you what move out your house next week so I can move in because my great grandad lived there generations ago. Didn't think so, but that is exactly the same as your proposals. Stay at your ground or relocate elsewhere but leave us racers alone and find some compassion and consideration for others.

I'm afraid I have to say speaking as a stock car racer that I find you anti racing protesters selfish inconsiderate and immoral. What justification can you have for the feeling it's your right to just evict our sport to make way for yours. I tell you what move out your house next week so I can move in because my great grandad lived there generations ago. Didn't think so, but that is exactly the same as your proposals. Stay at your ground or relocate elsewhere but leave us racers alone and find some compassion and consideration for others.Jacko308

Barry Lendrum wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.

They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.

the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.

Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.

Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.

Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?

AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..

Considering the small availability of land in London and the cost that comes with it, please tell us banger racing supporters how we will ever get another track in London? We cannot survive in London if Wimbledon goes, football can.

[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]winningallthetime[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Barry Lendrum[/bold] wrote:
Talk about the poll being fixed by outsiders and more than likely double-votings by the same unscruplous people. This final poll does not reflect true public opinion, as the sudden leapfrog right at the end is highly disproportionate to the rest of the poll time where AFC Wimbledon had the vast majority of votes. This poll has been fixed, and has now become meaningless.
They can have their stadium anywhere outside Wimbledon, maybe even in their own town or preferably in their home country of Northern Ireland, they are not town tied like football is, they might hate football or glory hunting Man Utd fans, but they are in a definite minority. Most people DO want football to return to Plough Lane.[/p][/quote]the stadium is on my front door almost and i support the plans for the greyhound stadium as do many others in the local area ,and for you to say this poll is fixed you must be having a laugh the fact this poll is on this newspapers site makes it completely biased and anyone with half a brain cell can see this newspaper are in support for afc Wimbledon.[/p][/quote]Here is another thing. I don't believe you. I doubt you're a local. Even you said so yourself that the local newspaper are in support for AFC Wimbledon.
Wimbledon fans were screwed over by dodgy businessmen including Pete Winkelman before because of the Taylor Report., this is just as bad. It cannot be allowed to happen a second time. You say it's your local area, do you really not care if your local football club dies or are continued to force to play outside Wimbledon in a stadium now too small for them? You're obviously not a football fan anyway.
Dog racing is a dying sport, and they and the stock car team allowed the stadium go to rack and ruin, and it will happen again if it's granted back to you. You can have your racing tracks anywhere as you're not tied like AFC Wimbledon are, so AFC's needs are far greater. You claim that you're a local yet you're willing to see your local football club die. MK fan?
AFC Wimbledon has the greater need, the FA Cup winners need to play in their own town again. They cannot play anywhere else whereas your sports can survive anywhere..[/p][/quote]Considering the small availability of land in London and the cost that comes with it, please tell us banger racing supporters how we will ever get another track in London? We cannot survive in London if Wimbledon goes, football can.Ilusions

Chuckie715 wrote:
Firstly we never let anything just go to rack and ruin. Fans pay there entrance, the promoter pays x amount to lease it from the grounds owners and they obviously didnt spend a penny of that on maintaining the place. So dont blame us or the dogs blame them.
Secondly if you think its that easy to build a track somewhere just like that, go for it by all means. Last time we did that with aldershot it took near on 20 years to find a suitable venue for a track to fit and close enough to the old one to be able to still call it aldershot, and raise the funds needed to, and build it . And as weve been there so long i feel we are geographicly tied to there as its always been known as wimbledon , had it been known as the london stadium then yes we could put it anywhere but its not . Also you cant contest a london championship in the middle of hampshire it doesnt work, just because you got tucked up years ago doesnt justify you doing it to us . And what hasnt helped from the start is the blatant one sidedness and narrow mindedness of merton council we want that so sod everything else ,so we were effectively buried before this hearing was even thought of. And the fact that a groundshare was offered previously but the football team turned there noses up at it and behaved like spoilt toddlers... I want it all for us its mine not yours im not sharing. Apologies if its offended some but its true, us and dogs have lost out because you wont share

You've said what most stock car fans are thinking. Very well put.

[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
Firstly we never let anything just go to rack and ruin. Fans pay there entrance, the promoter pays x amount to lease it from the grounds owners and they obviously didnt spend a penny of that on maintaining the place. So dont blame us or the dogs blame them.
Secondly if you think its that easy to build a track somewhere just like that, go for it by all means. Last time we did that with aldershot it took near on 20 years to find a suitable venue for a track to fit and close enough to the old one to be able to still call it aldershot, and raise the funds needed to, and build it . And as weve been there so long i feel we are geographicly tied to there as its always been known as wimbledon , had it been known as the london stadium then yes we could put it anywhere but its not . Also you cant contest a london championship in the middle of hampshire it doesnt work, just because you got tucked up years ago doesnt justify you doing it to us . And what hasnt helped from the start is the blatant one sidedness and narrow mindedness of merton council we want that so sod everything else ,so we were effectively buried before this hearing was even thought of. And the fact that a groundshare was offered previously but the football team turned there noses up at it and behaved like spoilt toddlers... I want it all for us its mine not yours im not sharing. Apologies if its offended some but its true, us and dogs have lost out because you wont share[/p][/quote]You've said what most stock car fans are thinking. Very well put.Ilusions

Greyhound racing offers the most fantastic value night out for people of all ages and from all backgrounds. The Greyhound are kept in decent conditions are loved to bits by their kennel staff and owners. They make exceptional pets when they have finished racing. I have owned ca. 20 Greyhounds and homed every single one of them when their racing careers are finished. In contrast to a no. of views on here, the sport is not dying. As well as daily & nightly coverage in every betting shop around the country 7 days per week, we have 2-4 3 hour shows on sky sports each month and free to air satellite coverage on Racing Post TV 5 nights per
week (Weds to Sunday) We have the Greyhound Derby at Wimbledon starting 30th May which now carries a winning prize of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds. Shelbourne Park in Dublin city centre shows how successful and popular a state of the art facility can be. Let's make Pascal's dream a reality! I have met him a few times and he's a man of great character and passion.

Greyhound racing offers the most fantastic value night out for people of all ages and from all backgrounds. The Greyhound are kept in decent conditions are loved to bits by their kennel staff and owners. They make exceptional pets when they have finished racing. I have owned ca. 20 Greyhounds and homed every single one of them when their racing careers are finished. In contrast to a no. of views on here, the sport is not dying. As well as daily & nightly coverage in every betting shop around the country 7 days per week, we have 2-4 3 hour shows on sky sports each month and free to air satellite coverage on Racing Post TV 5 nights per
week (Weds to Sunday) We have the Greyhound Derby at Wimbledon starting 30th May which now carries a winning prize of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds. Shelbourne Park in Dublin city centre shows how successful and popular a state of the art facility can be. Let's make Pascal's dream a reality! I have met him a few times and he's a man of great character and passion.smashiton

smashiton wrote:
Greyhound racing offers the most fantastic value night out for people of all ages and from all backgrounds. The Greyhound are kept in decent conditions are loved to bits by their kennel staff and owners. They make exceptional pets when they have finished racing. I have owned ca. 20 Greyhounds and homed every single one of them when their racing careers are finished. In contrast to a no. of views on here, the sport is not dying. As well as daily &amp; nightly coverage in every betting shop around the country 7 days per week, we have 2-4 3 hour shows on sky sports each month and free to air satellite coverage on Racing Post TV 5 nights per
week (Weds to Sunday) We have the Greyhound Derby at Wimbledon starting 30th May which now carries a winning prize of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds. Shelbourne Park in Dublin city centre shows how successful and popular a state of the art facility can be. Let's make Pascal's dream a reality! I have met him a few times and he's a man of great character and passion.

I'm really unsure how a gambling establishment brings sports diversity to the young of Wimbledon? we hold sports classes across the borough (and Kingston) with professional sports people, coaches and players. Take away the other arguments how does the dog stadium benefit all the community? we've already established Pashal has decided that the stock cars are no longer in the party, one less sport, what's on offer for the kids, Tic-tac for dummies courses?

[quote][p][bold]smashiton[/bold] wrote:
Greyhound racing offers the most fantastic value night out for people of all ages and from all backgrounds. The Greyhound are kept in decent conditions are loved to bits by their kennel staff and owners. They make exceptional pets when they have finished racing. I have owned ca. 20 Greyhounds and homed every single one of them when their racing careers are finished. In contrast to a no. of views on here, the sport is not dying. As well as daily & nightly coverage in every betting shop around the country 7 days per week, we have 2-4 3 hour shows on sky sports each month and free to air satellite coverage on Racing Post TV 5 nights per
week (Weds to Sunday) We have the Greyhound Derby at Wimbledon starting 30th May which now carries a winning prize of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds. Shelbourne Park in Dublin city centre shows how successful and popular a state of the art facility can be. Let's make Pascal's dream a reality! I have met him a few times and he's a man of great character and passion.[/p][/quote]I'm really unsure how a gambling establishment brings sports diversity to the young of Wimbledon? we hold sports classes across the borough (and Kingston) with professional sports people, coaches and players. Take away the other arguments how does the dog stadium benefit all the community? we've already established Pashal has decided that the stock cars are no longer in the party, one less sport, what's on offer for the kids, Tic-tac for dummies courses?yojimbo

In my experience, children absolutely love Greyhounds! Lots of people used to bring young children to Walthamstow in the summer, where they had a playground. Families with young children used to enjoy themselves. It was a safe, fun, value night out for a family. I'm sure Pascal will have considered families in his plans. The children also adore weekend kennel visits, the Greyhounds love all the attention!

In my experience, children absolutely love Greyhounds! Lots of people used to bring young children to Walthamstow in the summer, where they had a playground. Families with young children used to enjoy themselves. It was a safe, fun, value night out for a family. I'm sure Pascal will have considered families in his plans. The children also adore weekend kennel visits, the Greyhounds love all the attention!smashiton

I think that you may find the sudden surge in votes to keep the Greyhound Stadium at Wimbledon has actually come from none other than the huge community of Banger, Stock Car and Hot Rod Racers along with their families and fans who are disgusted by the complete disregard for their sport in this completely ridiculous fight for turf.
AFC Wimbledon fans may think that they have sole preference over this site as it is their 'home turf' etc, however the Stock Car Racing has also ben at this site for decades, so what about our historical value on the land? As my fellow racers have stated previously: if it is so easy to go and buy a plot of land elsewhere in London, why dont you show us? To lose Wimbledon Dtadi would be an absolute devastation for the entire racing community. To even consider getting somewhere else is unthinkable. The length of time it would take to get the funds together to purchase a plot of land, getting planning permission and council permission to build a race track, and then to set up the place as a new venue would escalate years... We would stand no chance of racing in London again for another 20 years at least.
Stock Car/Banger/Hot Rod racing doesnt get the publicity it deserves. Im positive if you football fans came to a meeting and felt what we all feel, you would think differently.
Could you imagine it the other way around? Imagine if you'd been at this stadium for 50+ years. Then imagine the stock cars and greyhounds came together with a bid that was enough to shove you out the door, just because this is their 'home site'. Would you be happy to leave? No, i didnt think so.
I for one think an agreement needs to be made to please all three parties; a football pitch, a dog track, a race track and a stadium all in one. And it can be done. Take a look at Cowdenbeath Stadium.

I think that you may find the sudden surge in votes to keep the Greyhound Stadium at Wimbledon has actually come from none other than the huge community of Banger, Stock Car and Hot Rod Racers along with their families and fans who are disgusted by the complete disregard for their sport in this completely ridiculous fight for turf.
AFC Wimbledon fans may think that they have sole preference over this site as it is their 'home turf' etc, however the Stock Car Racing has also ben at this site for decades, so what about our historical value on the land? As my fellow racers have stated previously: if it is so easy to go and buy a plot of land elsewhere in London, why dont you show us? To lose Wimbledon Dtadi would be an absolute devastation for the entire racing community. To even consider getting somewhere else is unthinkable. The length of time it would take to get the funds together to purchase a plot of land, getting planning permission and council permission to build a race track, and then to set up the place as a new venue would escalate years... We would stand no chance of racing in London again for another 20 years at least.
Stock Car/Banger/Hot Rod racing doesnt get the publicity it deserves. Im positive if you football fans came to a meeting and felt what we all feel, you would think differently.
Could you imagine it the other way around? Imagine if you'd been at this stadium for 50+ years. Then imagine the stock cars and greyhounds came together with a bid that was enough to shove you out the door, just because this is their 'home site'. Would you be happy to leave? No, i didnt think so.
I for one think an agreement needs to be made to please all three parties; a football pitch, a dog track, a race track and a stadium all in one. And it can be done. Take a look at Cowdenbeath Stadium.DANCE70

smashiton wrote:
Greyhound racing offers the most fantastic value night out for people of all ages and from all backgrounds. The Greyhound are kept in decent conditions are loved to bits by their kennel staff and owners. They make exceptional pets when they have finished racing. I have owned ca. 20 Greyhounds and homed every single one of them when their racing careers are finished. In contrast to a no. of views on here, the sport is not dying. As well as daily &amp; nightly coverage in every betting shop around the country 7 days per week, we have 2-4 3 hour shows on sky sports each month and free to air satellite coverage on Racing Post TV 5 nights per
week (Weds to Sunday) We have the Greyhound Derby at Wimbledon starting 30th May which now carries a winning prize of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds. Shelbourne Park in Dublin city centre shows how successful and popular a state of the art facility can be. Let's make Pascal's dream a reality! I have met him a few times and he's a man of great character and passion.

I'm really unsure how a gambling establishment brings sports diversity to the young of Wimbledon? we hold sports classes across the borough (and Kingston) with professional sports people, coaches and players. Take away the other arguments how does the dog stadium benefit all the community? we've already established Pashal has decided that the stock cars are no longer in the party, one less sport, what's on offer for the kids, Tic-tac for dummies courses?

Football benefits football fans no one else. Millions is bet on football matches in this country so the point about it being a gambling establishment is a pointless argument. Banger racing is not a gambling sport....
The real point people and the council should look at is that football is already over catered for in and around London, just look at the amount of stadiums already there! Bangers / stocks do not have the option of simply upping sticks and moving somewhere else as we stand no chance financially for a start.

[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]smashiton[/bold] wrote:
Greyhound racing offers the most fantastic value night out for people of all ages and from all backgrounds. The Greyhound are kept in decent conditions are loved to bits by their kennel staff and owners. They make exceptional pets when they have finished racing. I have owned ca. 20 Greyhounds and homed every single one of them when their racing careers are finished. In contrast to a no. of views on here, the sport is not dying. As well as daily & nightly coverage in every betting shop around the country 7 days per week, we have 2-4 3 hour shows on sky sports each month and free to air satellite coverage on Racing Post TV 5 nights per
week (Weds to Sunday) We have the Greyhound Derby at Wimbledon starting 30th May which now carries a winning prize of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds. Shelbourne Park in Dublin city centre shows how successful and popular a state of the art facility can be. Let's make Pascal's dream a reality! I have met him a few times and he's a man of great character and passion.[/p][/quote]I'm really unsure how a gambling establishment brings sports diversity to the young of Wimbledon? we hold sports classes across the borough (and Kingston) with professional sports people, coaches and players. Take away the other arguments how does the dog stadium benefit all the community? we've already established Pashal has decided that the stock cars are no longer in the party, one less sport, what's on offer for the kids, Tic-tac for dummies courses?[/p][/quote]Football benefits football fans no one else. Millions is bet on football matches in this country so the point about it being a gambling establishment is a pointless argument. Banger racing is not a gambling sport....
The real point people and the council should look at is that football is already over catered for in and around London, just look at the amount of stadiums already there! Bangers / stocks do not have the option of simply upping sticks and moving somewhere else as we stand no chance financially for a start.Ilusions

DANCE70 wrote:
I think that you may find the sudden surge in votes to keep the Greyhound Stadium at Wimbledon has actually come from none other than the huge community of Banger, Stock Car and Hot Rod Racers along with their families and fans who are disgusted by the complete disregard for their sport in this completely ridiculous fight for turf.
AFC Wimbledon fans may think that they have sole preference over this site as it is their 'home turf' etc, however the Stock Car Racing has also ben at this site for decades, so what about our historical value on the land? As my fellow racers have stated previously: if it is so easy to go and buy a plot of land elsewhere in London, why dont you show us? To lose Wimbledon Dtadi would be an absolute devastation for the entire racing community. To even consider getting somewhere else is unthinkable. The length of time it would take to get the funds together to purchase a plot of land, getting planning permission and council permission to build a race track, and then to set up the place as a new venue would escalate years... We would stand no chance of racing in London again for another 20 years at least.
Stock Car/Banger/Hot Rod racing doesnt get the publicity it deserves. Im positive if you football fans came to a meeting and felt what we all feel, you would think differently.
Could you imagine it the other way around? Imagine if you'd been at this stadium for 50+ years. Then imagine the stock cars and greyhounds came together with a bid that was enough to shove you out the door, just because this is their 'home site'. Would you be happy to leave? No, i didnt think so.
I for one think an agreement needs to be made to please all three parties; a football pitch, a dog track, a race track and a stadium all in one. And it can be done. Take a look at Cowdenbeath Stadium.

All the football team had to do was take away the concrete centre we used for figure of 8 fill it in , lay some turf and pretty much had a pitch ready to go since they got removed from the last one . Football pitch, banger track, dog track is there already if it saves time and money why not get afc , the gra, spedeworth to all club together to buy the stadium from whoever let it get to the state it has now . Think about it income from dog fans, banger fans and football lot combined per calendar year , not forgetting the market and whatever else happens in the pits/ carpark youll make your money back in no time . If it does come to that ill happily chip in im sure a few others would too

[quote][p][bold]DANCE70[/bold] wrote:
I think that you may find the sudden surge in votes to keep the Greyhound Stadium at Wimbledon has actually come from none other than the huge community of Banger, Stock Car and Hot Rod Racers along with their families and fans who are disgusted by the complete disregard for their sport in this completely ridiculous fight for turf.
AFC Wimbledon fans may think that they have sole preference over this site as it is their 'home turf' etc, however the Stock Car Racing has also ben at this site for decades, so what about our historical value on the land? As my fellow racers have stated previously: if it is so easy to go and buy a plot of land elsewhere in London, why dont you show us? To lose Wimbledon Dtadi would be an absolute devastation for the entire racing community. To even consider getting somewhere else is unthinkable. The length of time it would take to get the funds together to purchase a plot of land, getting planning permission and council permission to build a race track, and then to set up the place as a new venue would escalate years... We would stand no chance of racing in London again for another 20 years at least.
Stock Car/Banger/Hot Rod racing doesnt get the publicity it deserves. Im positive if you football fans came to a meeting and felt what we all feel, you would think differently.
Could you imagine it the other way around? Imagine if you'd been at this stadium for 50+ years. Then imagine the stock cars and greyhounds came together with a bid that was enough to shove you out the door, just because this is their 'home site'. Would you be happy to leave? No, i didnt think so.
I for one think an agreement needs to be made to please all three parties; a football pitch, a dog track, a race track and a stadium all in one. And it can be done. Take a look at Cowdenbeath Stadium.[/p][/quote]All the football team had to do was take away the concrete centre we used for figure of 8 fill it in , lay some turf and pretty much had a pitch ready to go since they got removed from the last one . Football pitch, banger track, dog track is there already if it saves time and money why not get afc , the gra, spedeworth to all club together to buy the stadium from whoever let it get to the state it has now . Think about it income from dog fans, banger fans and football lot combined per calendar year , not forgetting the market and whatever else happens in the pits/ carpark youll make your money back in no time . If it does come to that ill happily chip in im sure a few others would tooChuckie715

Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.

Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.yojimbo

yojimbo wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.

Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?

[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.[/p][/quote]Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?Ilusions

yojimbo wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.

Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?

the greyhound bid also removes the banger racing, the bid is a joint bid by galliard/risk they need a stadium to get permission from the council so the owners have chosen what they think is the most likely to fit all the requirements. We have not offered a cheque for that as far as I understand, if I'm wrong please could you qualify that statement. They need to choose a sport to be included in the plan thats why they asked us to get into bed with their proposal. If the owners of the land thought that greyhounds or the banger racing is more viable to get there plans through I'm sure they would have chosen those. As I've mentioned several times the footprint they have given us doesn't allow for a ring. Maybe the banger racing aficionados and it's owners should raise the issue with the owners of the land as to why they don't think their sport is viable to be included.

[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.[/p][/quote]Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?[/p][/quote]the greyhound bid also removes the banger racing, the bid is a joint bid by galliard/risk they need a stadium to get permission from the council so the owners have chosen what they think is the most likely to fit all the requirements. We have not offered a cheque for that as far as I understand, if I'm wrong please could you qualify that statement. They need to choose a sport to be included in the plan thats why they asked us to get into bed with their proposal. If the owners of the land thought that greyhounds or the banger racing is more viable to get there plans through I'm sure they would have chosen those. As I've mentioned several times the footprint they have given us doesn't allow for a ring. Maybe the banger racing aficionados and it's owners should raise the issue with the owners of the land as to why they don't think their sport is viable to be included.yojimbo

Illusions if you get time, please take a look at this site and you can see the plans by the landowner, invluding the area they have allowed for the stadium and you can see we have limited scope to ask banger racing to be part of that. http://bringthedonsh
ome.org/faq/

Illusions if you get time, please take a look at this site and you can see the plans by the landowner, invluding the area they have allowed for the stadium and you can see we have limited scope to ask banger racing to be part of that. http://bringthedonsh
ome.org/faq/yojimbo

yojimbo wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.

Ours would do that too with 4 seperate junior formulas seeing similar if not better fields of drivers than some adult formulas, with id think a fair few inside the m25. but it still begs the question why we cant come together so we do own the land and avoid the situation were in now rather than bickering about it and someone losing out. Its clear the stadium owners dont give a hoot Like i said before easy cot effective solutions could have been done years ago to the infield, but for reasons unknown no one went for it

[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.[/p][/quote]Ours would do that too with 4 seperate junior formulas seeing similar if not better fields of drivers than some adult formulas, with id think a fair few inside the m25. but it still begs the question why we cant come together so we do own the land and avoid the situation were in now rather than bickering about it and someone losing out. Its clear the stadium owners dont give a hoot Like i said before easy cot effective solutions could have been done years ago to the infield, but for reasons unknown no one went for itChuckie715

yojimbo wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.

Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?

the greyhound bid also removes the banger racing, the bid is a joint bid by galliard/risk they need a stadium to get permission from the council so the owners have chosen what they think is the most likely to fit all the requirements. We have not offered a cheque for that as far as I understand, if I'm wrong please could you qualify that statement. They need to choose a sport to be included in the plan thats why they asked us to get into bed with their proposal. If the owners of the land thought that greyhounds or the banger racing is more viable to get there plans through I'm sure they would have chosen those. As I've mentioned several times the footprint they have given us doesn't allow for a ring. Maybe the banger racing aficionados and it's owners should raise the issue with the owners of the land as to why they don't think their sport is viable to be included.

Galliard/risk will go with whatever plan will raise the most profit. End of. That is all this comes down too. Business. Are you really saying a redeveloped Wimbledon could not have included a stock car track so everyones needs were met? Sporting intesification was supposed to be a major part of redevelopment, yet you are happy in destroying an existing sport..
I note how the website doesn't once mention stock car racing or existing users who will be displaced. Double standards again.

[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.[/p][/quote]Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?[/p][/quote]the greyhound bid also removes the banger racing, the bid is a joint bid by galliard/risk they need a stadium to get permission from the council so the owners have chosen what they think is the most likely to fit all the requirements. We have not offered a cheque for that as far as I understand, if I'm wrong please could you qualify that statement. They need to choose a sport to be included in the plan thats why they asked us to get into bed with their proposal. If the owners of the land thought that greyhounds or the banger racing is more viable to get there plans through I'm sure they would have chosen those. As I've mentioned several times the footprint they have given us doesn't allow for a ring. Maybe the banger racing aficionados and it's owners should raise the issue with the owners of the land as to why they don't think their sport is viable to be included.[/p][/quote]Galliard/risk will go with whatever plan will raise the most profit. End of. That is all this comes down too. Business. Are you really saying a redeveloped Wimbledon could not have included a stock car track so everyones needs were met? Sporting intesification was supposed to be a major part of redevelopment, yet you are happy in destroying an existing sport..
I note how the website doesn't once mention stock car racing or existing users who will be displaced. Double standards again.Ilusions

yojimbo wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.

Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?

the greyhound bid also removes the banger racing, the bid is a joint bid by galliard/risk they need a stadium to get permission from the council so the owners have chosen what they think is the most likely to fit all the requirements. We have not offered a cheque for that as far as I understand, if I'm wrong please could you qualify that statement. They need to choose a sport to be included in the plan thats why they asked us to get into bed with their proposal. If the owners of the land thought that greyhounds or the banger racing is more viable to get there plans through I'm sure they would have chosen those. As I've mentioned several times the footprint they have given us doesn't allow for a ring. Maybe the banger racing aficionados and it's owners should raise the issue with the owners of the land as to why they don't think their sport is viable to be included.

Galliard/risk will go with whatever plan will raise the most profit. End of. That is all this comes down too. Business. Are you really saying a redeveloped Wimbledon could not have included a stock car track so everyones needs were met? Sporting intesification was supposed to be a major part of redevelopment, yet you are happy in destroying an existing sport..
I note how the website doesn't once mention stock car racing or existing users who will be displaced. Double standards again.

Okay, thanks for taking the time to read it. I've always agreed with the point about it being a business deal, infact I said both deals on the table at the mo are that several comments back. Also, I've never said our manifesto included a ring for dogs/cars, we don't own the land! I said ages ago it was a business decision by the owners, it so happens that a stadium for football/rugby stadium is what Galliard and Risk think will win them planning permission. If you've seen the plans you will see the land they have set aside for the stadium doesn't have the footprint for a ring. That needs to be understood right? We have no say in how much land Galliard/Risk will give us. I think we've thrashed out a deal for space to increase up to 20,000 to allow for growth, as initially Galliard offered room for a 15K stadium. They are now giving us the max amount of land to build something that has the most amount of sports and leave them with the rest to build housing on. That is their decision which unfortunately for bangers doesn't have enough room for the ring racing would need, but fortunately for us we have benefited from. On that note, Spedworth have never put a joint proposal with Galliard as far as I'm aware do you know why? Also Pascal's bid has removed the idea of banger racing, do Spedworth not think it's viable now? Lastly if you've followed this process since Merton called for sites a couple of years back you have seen Galliard never initially had plans for any football stadium, they own the land and would happily put all housing there, luckily in the first round the council acknowledged that they want some sort of sport there, so they adapted their plans to include us. If they win we would get enough land to build a reasonable size stadium that benefits AFC Wimbledon in the future. Excuse me if I've repeated myself Illusions.

[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
Just to clear a point, the football team don't own the land, we have been allowed a small footprint to produce a stadium that can increase sporting intensification while allowing the developers to increase the number of residential builds in the area. make no mistake both plans submitted are development plans to make money, but the council have put in a sweetener for the community to insist on a stadium/gym etc. Infact, the owners original plans were purely for building flats, shops and i think a hotel. the council advised this plan was against their call for sporting intensification, so Galliard realised they had to get into bed with a plan that included stadia. They must have decided ours was the best overall that would convince the council it would adhere to that call. Obviously there are more sports than football which can be played on the pitch we would create too, which are in our plans - rugby and gridiron have been suggested. Unfortunately the space we have been allowed by the developers who own the land doesn't allow the inclusion of a ring, for any of the current activities. Sadly for banger racing I don't think modern stadiums entertain the need for a ring. By the way, I believe the plan by the other party does not include allowances for any motorsport either (a change of heart by the way) . Just to answer Illusion's other points, football of course is for football fans but as I've pointed out our plans include other sports and as we are already proving, at this present time, we have many projects in the community for young and old which are not just based around football. We are are a community club in Merton already even though at present we play a bit outside the area. My points was really to the people who are backing the dog stadium development, which is what this article is about. Also I never said the banger racing was about gambling, my question to the dog stadium backers. Lastly, yes gambling is now part of the the package for football and other sports, crikey you can bet on the weather but betting is not the reason football exists. If say gambling was banned, football would still carry on, greyhound racing would not. So again, I still can't see how the current plan from Pascal which rightly or wrongly doesn't include a provision for banger racing, increases sporting intensification, in fact their plan has already removed a sport from it since it's original concept. Our's definitely increases sport in the area.[/p][/quote]Your plan for a football ground removes an existing sport, banger racing. The current owners frankly couldn't care less which plan brings in more sport, the deciding factor for them was obviously capital return and afc are waving the biggest cheque apparently.
For all the pro football arguments on here, I am yet to here any sound argument or justification for displacing a sport with 50 years of history there. Why wont afc offer a shared ground?[/p][/quote]the greyhound bid also removes the banger racing, the bid is a joint bid by galliard/risk they need a stadium to get permission from the council so the owners have chosen what they think is the most likely to fit all the requirements. We have not offered a cheque for that as far as I understand, if I'm wrong please could you qualify that statement. They need to choose a sport to be included in the plan thats why they asked us to get into bed with their proposal. If the owners of the land thought that greyhounds or the banger racing is more viable to get there plans through I'm sure they would have chosen those. As I've mentioned several times the footprint they have given us doesn't allow for a ring. Maybe the banger racing aficionados and it's owners should raise the issue with the owners of the land as to why they don't think their sport is viable to be included.[/p][/quote]Galliard/risk will go with whatever plan will raise the most profit. End of. That is all this comes down too. Business. Are you really saying a redeveloped Wimbledon could not have included a stock car track so everyones needs were met? Sporting intesification was supposed to be a major part of redevelopment, yet you are happy in destroying an existing sport..
I note how the website doesn't once mention stock car racing or existing users who will be displaced. Double standards again.[/p][/quote]Okay, thanks for taking the time to read it. I've always agreed with the point about it being a business deal, infact I said both deals on the table at the mo are that several comments back. Also, I've never said our manifesto included a ring for dogs/cars, we don't own the land! I said ages ago it was a business decision by the owners, it so happens that a stadium for football/rugby stadium is what Galliard and Risk think will win them planning permission. If you've seen the plans you will see the land they have set aside for the stadium doesn't have the footprint for a ring. That needs to be understood right? We have no say in how much land Galliard/Risk will give us. I think we've thrashed out a deal for space to increase up to 20,000 to allow for growth, as initially Galliard offered room for a 15K stadium. They are now giving us the max amount of land to build something that has the most amount of sports and leave them with the rest to build housing on. That is their decision which unfortunately for bangers doesn't have enough room for the ring racing would need, but fortunately for us we have benefited from. On that note, Spedworth have never put a joint proposal with Galliard as far as I'm aware do you know why? Also Pascal's bid has removed the idea of banger racing, do Spedworth not think it's viable now? Lastly if you've followed this process since Merton called for sites a couple of years back you have seen Galliard never initially had plans for any football stadium, they own the land and would happily put all housing there, luckily in the first round the council acknowledged that they want some sort of sport there, so they adapted their plans to include us. If they win we would get enough land to build a reasonable size stadium that benefits AFC Wimbledon in the future. Excuse me if I've repeated myself Illusions.yojimbo

The website you mentioned was interesting but predictable bias. A football club who lost their home now doing the same to another sport. You couldn't make it up!
The website has no mention of existing users or what this means for them but It does say that football was played on the site for a few years until 1912 and then you moved. If that is the extent of your historical claim to the site then frankly its rubbish and 50 years of oval racing obviously exceeds that. Why don't afc go knocking on the door of the developers who turned your old ground into flats and demand it back on historical grounds?
Can you not see how bad this looks on you as a club? Merton council are singing your praises and now want you back but didn't care at the time and allowed you to go. They sold you out and now we are in line for the same. This is about morals, what's right and wrong.
The truth is we are near where your old stadium was, we are the next best thing and to hell with what we think or the consequences for us long term. We are not a sport full of money and therefore have options otherwise I'm sure Spedeworth would have made an offer if it was viable.
If this was the other way round you would not be supporting it.

The website you mentioned was interesting but predictable bias. A football club who lost their home now doing the same to another sport. You couldn't make it up!
The website has no mention of existing users or what this means for them but It does say that football was played on the site for a few years until 1912 and then you moved. If that is the extent of your historical claim to the site then frankly its rubbish and 50 years of oval racing obviously exceeds that. Why don't afc go knocking on the door of the developers who turned your old ground into flats and demand it back on historical grounds?
Can you not see how bad this looks on you as a club? Merton council are singing your praises and now want you back but didn't care at the time and allowed you to go. They sold you out and now we are in line for the same. This is about morals, what's right and wrong.
The truth is we are near where your old stadium was, we are the next best thing and to hell with what we think or the consequences for us long term. We are not a sport full of money and therefore have options otherwise I'm sure Spedeworth would have made an offer if it was viable.
If this was the other way round you would not be supporting it.Ilusions

Ilusions wrote:
The website you mentioned was interesting but predictable bias. A football club who lost their home now doing the same to another sport. You couldn't make it up!
The website has no mention of existing users or what this means for them but It does say that football was played on the site for a few years until 1912 and then you moved. If that is the extent of your historical claim to the site then frankly its rubbish and 50 years of oval racing obviously exceeds that. Why don't afc go knocking on the door of the developers who turned your old ground into flats and demand it back on historical grounds?
Can you not see how bad this looks on you as a club? Merton council are singing your praises and now want you back but didn't care at the time and allowed you to go. They sold you out and now we are in line for the same. This is about morals, what's right and wrong.
The truth is we are near where your old stadium was, we are the next best thing and to hell with what we think or the consequences for us long term. We are not a sport full of money and therefore have options otherwise I'm sure Spedeworth would have made an offer if it was viable.
If this was the other way round you would not be supporting it.

I do understand your pain Illusions, I actually like the banger racing and used to enjoy Speedway too when there, so it would definitely be a bitter sweet result for the football team if Galliard to go through with their plans for the stadium. I believe (and as you have hinted at) the fact of the matter is they are going to build that type of stadium and not a racing circuit as they, for whatever reason don't see it as viable. We of course will benefit from that (if the decision goes in their favour). I think you should take the discussion up with Galliard/Risk though as to why they have chosen a field based sporting arena over a racing venue, although i'm sure it all comes down to the fact which business has legs. I must admit I don't know if banger racing is doing well commercially but Galliard and Spedworth must have figures and projections as to a successful business going into the future and not build an arena which became a white elephant.

[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
The website you mentioned was interesting but predictable bias. A football club who lost their home now doing the same to another sport. You couldn't make it up!
The website has no mention of existing users or what this means for them but It does say that football was played on the site for a few years until 1912 and then you moved. If that is the extent of your historical claim to the site then frankly its rubbish and 50 years of oval racing obviously exceeds that. Why don't afc go knocking on the door of the developers who turned your old ground into flats and demand it back on historical grounds?
Can you not see how bad this looks on you as a club? Merton council are singing your praises and now want you back but didn't care at the time and allowed you to go. They sold you out and now we are in line for the same. This is about morals, what's right and wrong.
The truth is we are near where your old stadium was, we are the next best thing and to hell with what we think or the consequences for us long term. We are not a sport full of money and therefore have options otherwise I'm sure Spedeworth would have made an offer if it was viable.
If this was the other way round you would not be supporting it.[/p][/quote]I do understand your pain Illusions, I actually like the banger racing and used to enjoy Speedway too when there, so it would definitely be a bitter sweet result for the football team if Galliard to go through with their plans for the stadium. I believe (and as you have hinted at) the fact of the matter is they are going to build that type of stadium and not a racing circuit as they, for whatever reason don't see it as viable. We of course will benefit from that (if the decision goes in their favour). I think you should take the discussion up with Galliard/Risk though as to why they have chosen a field based sporting arena over a racing venue, although i'm sure it all comes down to the fact which business has legs. I must admit I don't know if banger racing is doing well commercially but Galliard and Spedworth must have figures and projections as to a successful business going into the future and not build an arena which became a white elephant.yojimbo

I would assume that the developer in question can see more profit in this deal as it allows more housing to be built. Spedeworth only pay rent/lease the venues they use (please correct me if I'm wrong) so I don't know where they would stand on funding for a half owned track with another party. I'm sure they do not want to lose there sole London venue anymore than us fans. They obviously turn enough of a profit from Wimbledon as is otherwise it wouldn't have been as long standing as it is.
As I have said, the real point is that we as a community are having the place sold from beneath us to people who have had the same done to them. All in all very sad that it has come to this.

I would assume that the developer in question can see more profit in this deal as it allows more housing to be built. Spedeworth only pay rent/lease the venues they use (please correct me if I'm wrong) so I don't know where they would stand on funding for a half owned track with another party. I'm sure they do not want to lose there sole London venue anymore than us fans. They obviously turn enough of a profit from Wimbledon as is otherwise it wouldn't have been as long standing as it is.
As I have said, the real point is that we as a community are having the place sold from beneath us to people who have had the same done to them. All in all very sad that it has come to this.Ilusions

The only reason Galliard are doing business with AFC Wimbledon is to get planning permission to build flats and as many as they can. AFC will not own the ground but pay a lease to Galliard each year. Take a look at Coventry who pay a lease to the local council and venture capitalists and are now in dispute and looking for a site to build their own ground. Any club with ambition need to have their own ground to increase their revenues. There would be no point in building a 20000 seater stadium as Wimbledon would never get that. They left the borough for financial reasons and coming back for those same reasons. Give it a few years and Galliard will make an offer AFC cannot refuse. Its romantic pie in the sky. Greyhound Racing although not attracting anywhere near the audiences it used to have is viable but not in the hands of the GRA/Risk/Galliard who are selectively running the next stadium down for development. The bottom line to all this is money. The council believe they will be better off with Galliard and an unviable football club back in the borough. Money talks. AFC Wimbledon have none and will have none under proposed arrangements. Fans who stump up bond money need to look at the financing extremely carefully instead of just dreaming.

The only reason Galliard are doing business with AFC Wimbledon is to get planning permission to build flats and as many as they can. AFC will not own the ground but pay a lease to Galliard each year. Take a look at Coventry who pay a lease to the local council and venture capitalists and are now in dispute and looking for a site to build their own ground. Any club with ambition need to have their own ground to increase their revenues. There would be no point in building a 20000 seater stadium as Wimbledon would never get that. They left the borough for financial reasons and coming back for those same reasons. Give it a few years and Galliard will make an offer AFC cannot refuse. Its romantic pie in the sky. Greyhound Racing although not attracting anywhere near the audiences it used to have is viable but not in the hands of the GRA/Risk/Galliard who are selectively running the next stadium down for development. The bottom line to all this is money. The council believe they will be better off with Galliard and an unviable football club back in the borough. Money talks. AFC Wimbledon have none and will have none under proposed arrangements. Fans who stump up bond money need to look at the financing extremely carefully instead of just dreaming.bishbosh

bishbosh wrote:
The only reason Galliard are doing business with AFC Wimbledon is to get planning permission to build flats and as many as they can. AFC will not own the ground but pay a lease to Galliard each year. Take a look at Coventry who pay a lease to the local council and venture capitalists and are now in dispute and looking for a site to build their own ground. Any club with ambition need to have their own ground to increase their revenues. There would be no point in building a 20000 seater stadium as Wimbledon would never get that. They left the borough for financial reasons and coming back for those same reasons. Give it a few years and Galliard will make an offer AFC cannot refuse. Its romantic pie in the sky. Greyhound Racing although not attracting anywhere near the audiences it used to have is viable but not in the hands of the GRA/Risk/Galliard who are selectively running the next stadium down for development. The bottom line to all this is money. The council believe they will be better off with Galliard and an unviable football club back in the borough. Money talks. AFC Wimbledon have none and will have none under proposed arrangements. Fans who stump up bond money need to look at the financing extremely carefully instead of just dreaming.

Sorry wrong on several points, we would own the stadium and the team as we have to pay for it ourselves we would lease the land and it would be a long one as I understand, and I'm sure it's peppercorn and the council wouldn't make the same mistake twice of losing any sporting covenants in place. So we would take all matchday revenue and invest in the club and community. Not quite fair to compare the Coventry situation, they are unfortunately owned by a succession of hedge funds/venture capitalists who were trying to leverage the local council into giving them the matchday revenue. Coventry council (under ACL) own and payed for the ground and the land. The leverage has backfired as ACL are not being stonewalled, the council want their money back which was always agreed by match day revenue. next point we are not aiming to build a 20K stadium, initially it would be 11K. We have 4 stands at the moment 3 of them sell out all the time, as one is so terrible to stand in now we are full. So we have people on waiting lists for the other three stands. So could easily see regular (conservative figures) of 5-6k in a more comfortable stadium and for bigger games closer to capacity in the league we currently find ourselves in. Not including the 'new stadium affect' which attracts new supporters. 20 K in the plans gives us scope to grow slowly in the future if necessary. We have some very smart volunteers running our bid along with professional planners and architects who have crunched the numbers and are convinced we could run a viable football club. I'm sure the only pie would be the award winning locally produced ones sold at the ground!

[quote][p][bold]bishbosh[/bold] wrote:
The only reason Galliard are doing business with AFC Wimbledon is to get planning permission to build flats and as many as they can. AFC will not own the ground but pay a lease to Galliard each year. Take a look at Coventry who pay a lease to the local council and venture capitalists and are now in dispute and looking for a site to build their own ground. Any club with ambition need to have their own ground to increase their revenues. There would be no point in building a 20000 seater stadium as Wimbledon would never get that. They left the borough for financial reasons and coming back for those same reasons. Give it a few years and Galliard will make an offer AFC cannot refuse. Its romantic pie in the sky. Greyhound Racing although not attracting anywhere near the audiences it used to have is viable but not in the hands of the GRA/Risk/Galliard who are selectively running the next stadium down for development. The bottom line to all this is money. The council believe they will be better off with Galliard and an unviable football club back in the borough. Money talks. AFC Wimbledon have none and will have none under proposed arrangements. Fans who stump up bond money need to look at the financing extremely carefully instead of just dreaming.[/p][/quote]Sorry wrong on several points, we would own the stadium and the team as we have to pay for it ourselves we would lease the land and it would be a long one as I understand, and I'm sure it's peppercorn and the council wouldn't make the same mistake twice of losing any sporting covenants in place. So we would take all matchday revenue and invest in the club and community. Not quite fair to compare the Coventry situation, they are unfortunately owned by a succession of hedge funds/venture capitalists who were trying to leverage the local council into giving them the matchday revenue. Coventry council (under ACL) own and payed for the ground and the land. The leverage has backfired as ACL are not being stonewalled, the council want their money back which was always agreed by match day revenue. next point we are not aiming to build a 20K stadium, initially it would be 11K. We have 4 stands at the moment 3 of them sell out all the time, as one is so terrible to stand in now we are full. So we have people on waiting lists for the other three stands. So could easily see regular (conservative figures) of 5-6k in a more comfortable stadium and for bigger games closer to capacity in the league we currently find ourselves in. Not including the 'new stadium affect' which attracts new supporters. 20 K in the plans gives us scope to grow slowly in the future if necessary. We have some very smart volunteers running our bid along with professional planners and architects who have crunched the numbers and are convinced we could run a viable football club. I'm sure the only pie would be the award winning locally produced ones sold at the ground!yojimbo

So you would own the stadium, but not the land it stands on. I don't think I'd be too happy investing £16 million of other peoples money on the proviso that the lease remains affordable. Where is the £16 million initially required for your plan coming from and if you are expecting say 6,000 per game (just for argument sake) how are you going to pay wages, cover costs and make a profit?

So you would own the stadium, but not the land it stands on. I don't think I'd be too happy investing £16 million of other peoples money on the proviso that the lease remains affordable. Where is the £16 million initially required for your plan coming from and if you are expecting say 6,000 per game (just for argument sake) how are you going to pay wages, cover costs and make a profit?Ilusions

Ilusions wrote:
So you would own the stadium, but not the land it stands on. I don't think I'd be too happy investing £16 million of other peoples money on the proviso that the lease remains affordable. Where is the £16 million initially required for your plan coming from and if you are expecting say 6,000 per game (just for argument sake) how are you going to pay wages, cover costs and make a profit?

Why not? a lot of people buy there houses with leases? Anyhoo, If the council write a covenant into the lease that it has to have sport there, as I'm sure they are planning, it will be even stronger agreement. We survive at the moment on crowds of 4400, not sure how we couldn't thrive when we get more.^k i believe is a conservative figure. we are the 7th best attended league two club in the smallest ground. Other teams surrive on smaller gronds. we actually are very frugal and don't spend our money on agents etc. As far as I know we have operated in the black since conception.

I might have confused the issue but I meant that figure as the crowd for regular home supporters. I believe our total average would be slightly higher in a comfortable stadium if you included away followers, even in league two. Floaters would come and might come back, not being put off by the bad view from the stand or leaky roofs etc.

I think i sent you that plan yesterday that showed how the money is to be raised for the ground. We have planned stadium naming rights, commercial deals, bond/share issues as we have done so far to rise up the leagues.

I have some questions, I'm very curious why Pascal and Spedworth haven't come up with a joint plan, is that not viable? Why has the GRA not considered to place a dog stadium there, over a football stadium?

[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
So you would own the stadium, but not the land it stands on. I don't think I'd be too happy investing £16 million of other peoples money on the proviso that the lease remains affordable. Where is the £16 million initially required for your plan coming from and if you are expecting say 6,000 per game (just for argument sake) how are you going to pay wages, cover costs and make a profit?[/p][/quote]Why not? a lot of people buy there houses with leases? Anyhoo, If the council write a covenant into the lease that it has to have sport there, as I'm sure they are planning, it will be even stronger agreement. We survive at the moment on crowds of 4400, not sure how we couldn't thrive when we get more.^k i believe is a conservative figure. we are the 7th best attended league two club in the smallest ground. Other teams surrive on smaller gronds. we actually are very frugal and don't spend our money on agents etc. As far as I know we have operated in the black since conception.
I might have confused the issue but I meant that figure as the crowd for regular home supporters. I believe our total average would be slightly higher in a comfortable stadium if you included away followers, even in league two. Floaters would come and might come back, not being put off by the bad view from the stand or leaky roofs etc.
I think i sent you that plan yesterday that showed how the money is to be raised for the ground. We have planned stadium naming rights, commercial deals, bond/share issues as we have done so far to rise up the leagues.
I have some questions, I'm very curious why Pascal and Spedworth haven't come up with a joint plan, is that not viable? Why has the GRA not considered to place a dog stadium there, over a football stadium?yojimbo

Ilusions wrote:
So you would own the stadium, but not the land it stands on. I don't think I'd be too happy investing £16 million of other peoples money on the proviso that the lease remains affordable. Where is the £16 million initially required for your plan coming from and if you are expecting say 6,000 per game (just for argument sake) how are you going to pay wages, cover costs and make a profit?

Why not? a lot of people buy there houses with leases? Anyhoo, If the council write a covenant into the lease that it has to have sport there, as I'm sure they are planning, it will be even stronger agreement. We survive at the moment on crowds of 4400, not sure how we couldn't thrive when we get more.^k i believe is a conservative figure. we are the 7th best attended league two club in the smallest ground. Other teams surrive on smaller gronds. we actually are very frugal and don't spend our money on agents etc. As far as I know we have operated in the black since conception.

I might have confused the issue but I meant that figure as the crowd for regular home supporters. I believe our total average would be slightly higher in a comfortable stadium if you included away followers, even in league two. Floaters would come and might come back, not being put off by the bad view from the stand or leaky roofs etc.

I think i sent you that plan yesterday that showed how the money is to be raised for the ground. We have planned stadium naming rights, commercial deals, bond/share issues as we have done so far to rise up the leagues.

I have some questions, I'm very curious why Pascal and Spedworth haven't come up with a joint plan, is that not viable? Why has the GRA not considered to place a dog stadium there, over a football stadium?

The following is from Wikipedia. Very interesting reading!

In 2005 GRA Ltd was sold by Wembley PLC to venture capitalists Risk Capital Partners Ltd for £50 million. The Managing Director Clive Feltham remained at the helm after the takeover.
As a result of the takeover GRA have been in a perilous position after their parent company revealed that Galliard Homes have a financial interest in the group. This could spell the end of GRA as a greyhound operator.
In 2009 the Portsmouth Stadium track was sold by Risk Capital to pay down debt. It closed the same year.
Then on December 29, 2012 the GRA closed Oxford.
Wimbledon is subject to planning permission for housing and the GRA have struggled to keep up with other greyhound operators having to cut costs like prize money
The company continue to struggle under parent company Risk Capital.

[quote][p][bold]yojimbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
So you would own the stadium, but not the land it stands on. I don't think I'd be too happy investing £16 million of other peoples money on the proviso that the lease remains affordable. Where is the £16 million initially required for your plan coming from and if you are expecting say 6,000 per game (just for argument sake) how are you going to pay wages, cover costs and make a profit?[/p][/quote]Why not? a lot of people buy there houses with leases? Anyhoo, If the council write a covenant into the lease that it has to have sport there, as I'm sure they are planning, it will be even stronger agreement. We survive at the moment on crowds of 4400, not sure how we couldn't thrive when we get more.^k i believe is a conservative figure. we are the 7th best attended league two club in the smallest ground. Other teams surrive on smaller gronds. we actually are very frugal and don't spend our money on agents etc. As far as I know we have operated in the black since conception.
I might have confused the issue but I meant that figure as the crowd for regular home supporters. I believe our total average would be slightly higher in a comfortable stadium if you included away followers, even in league two. Floaters would come and might come back, not being put off by the bad view from the stand or leaky roofs etc.
I think i sent you that plan yesterday that showed how the money is to be raised for the ground. We have planned stadium naming rights, commercial deals, bond/share issues as we have done so far to rise up the leagues.
I have some questions, I'm very curious why Pascal and Spedworth haven't come up with a joint plan, is that not viable? Why has the GRA not considered to place a dog stadium there, over a football stadium?[/p][/quote]The following is from Wikipedia. Very interesting reading!
In 2005 GRA Ltd was sold by Wembley PLC to venture capitalists Risk Capital Partners Ltd for £50 million. The Managing Director Clive Feltham remained at the helm after the takeover.
As a result of the takeover GRA have been in a perilous position after their parent company revealed that Galliard Homes have a financial interest in the group. This could spell the end of GRA as a greyhound operator.[6]
In 2009 the Portsmouth Stadium track was sold by Risk Capital to pay down debt. It closed the same year.
Then on December 29, 2012 the GRA closed Oxford.
Wimbledon is subject to planning permission for housing[7] and the GRA have struggled to keep up with other greyhound operators having to cut costs like prize money[8]
The company continue to struggle under parent company Risk Capital.Ilusions

I find it quite ironic that AFC Wimbledon seem happy to turf out another sport from its stadium - to put right a decision that saw them turfed out of theirs. The difference being that to start a oval racing venue from scratch would take a lot more than starting a football club, especially in a city driven by profit and greed. Where would you suggest an area of land large enough, available to build upon and with the permission to make a noise?

Stock car racing has 50 years of racing history in that stadium, it may look tired but its the premier stadium in the country and the only one left in the entire of London. The day that not a single motorsport stadium remains in the capital of the UK is a very sad day indeed!

I find it quite ironic that AFC Wimbledon seem happy to turf out another sport from its stadium - to put right a decision that saw them turfed out of theirs. The difference being that to start a oval racing venue from scratch would take a lot more than starting a football club, especially in a city driven by profit and greed. Where would you suggest an area of land large enough, available to build upon and with the permission to make a noise?
Stock car racing has 50 years of racing history in that stadium, it may look tired but its the premier stadium in the country and the only one left in the entire of London. The day that not a single motorsport stadium remains in the capital of the UK is a very sad day indeed!Ss7tcb

AFC Wimbledon are not the team that lost their ground in Plough Lane , MK Dons are so why do you AFC fans think you have a right to push out other sports so you can return with a team that get even less support than the real Wimbledon team did ?

AFC Wimbledon are not the team that lost their ground in Plough Lane , MK Dons are so why do you AFC fans think you have a right to push out other sports so you can return with a team that get even less support than the real Wimbledon team did ?wiggle96

Surely it is a romantic notion to that Wimbledon could reach the glory days once again. They financially failed and left the borough with no tangible assets apart from their split fan base and lower division players. There will of course be an initial enthusiasm, maybe a new chairman with grand ideas, and overspend and reliance on debt and failure once again. There are no options with just a football stadium except "plough on". A multi use stadium provides more for the local community and financial security. This will of course not happen as Galliard are house builders and need every last sq metre. It is very much up to the local authority to get the best all round deal. Of course this will not happen as they will succumb to the money and government pressure as many other cash strapped authorities have done. The mayor believes a large development that on all known viability studies will make an initial loss of 22 million is viable. The fact the developer would appeal and probably win had a large bearing on his decision.. Local residents who voted almost 90% against the overcrowding it would bring were ignored. There is no overwhelming support for the football stadium but money and influence talks. So AFC see a golden opportunity to partner with Galliard who likely have minimal interest in what AFC want as long as it gets them planning permission. What happens when gates fall and AFC cannot meet player wages and stadium maintenance. They will already be in debt up to it and borrowed or begged massive amounts from their small fan base. AFC will not own the ground they have spent so much on..just a footballing lease and as someone suggested a peppercorn rent. All the suggestion of a peppercorn rent suggests to me is this is a pre determined decision by the local authority and WWW were bang on in calling for the independant inspector. The GRA/Risk/Galliard have no interest in investing in the long term future of greyhound racing. Why because the GRA incurred a massive debt on their borrowing (50 million) some years ago. The GRA once owned 15 stadiums that have gradually been pared down to service this debt. Venture capitalists jumped in and dealt with Galliard...a no brainer as the money is in development and houses. I believe RBS had the debt that was transferred to NAMA who want their money. Small greyhound track operators make money and the sport is still viable properly managed. Hall Green, Perry Bar and Belle Vue now leased by the GRA from Galliard (no longer owned) are rammed at the weekends and are viable but not enough for service the debt. There is minimal investment now in these tracks that is why the current Wimbledon Stadium is poor. Galliard and Nama want it for housing. Why do they want a football stadium paying nothing toward the land they own? The GRA over leveraged and got hit by two recessions. Current AFC fans should remove the rose tint and see the lesson in this.

Surely it is a romantic notion to that Wimbledon could reach the glory days once again. They financially failed and left the borough with no tangible assets apart from their split fan base and lower division players. There will of course be an initial enthusiasm, maybe a new chairman with grand ideas, and overspend and reliance on debt and failure once again. There are no options with just a football stadium except "plough on". A multi use stadium provides more for the local community and financial security. This will of course not happen as Galliard are house builders and need every last sq metre. It is very much up to the local authority to get the best all round deal. Of course this will not happen as they will succumb to the money and government pressure as many other cash strapped authorities have done. The mayor believes a large development that on all known viability studies will make an initial loss of 22 million is viable. The fact the developer would appeal and probably win had a large bearing on his decision.. Local residents who voted almost 90% against the overcrowding it would bring were ignored. There is no overwhelming support for the football stadium but money and influence talks. So AFC see a golden opportunity to partner with Galliard who likely have minimal interest in what AFC want as long as it gets them planning permission. What happens when gates fall and AFC cannot meet player wages and stadium maintenance. They will already be in debt up to it and borrowed or begged massive amounts from their small fan base. AFC will not own the ground they have spent so much on..just a footballing lease and as someone suggested a peppercorn rent. All the suggestion of a peppercorn rent suggests to me is this is a pre determined decision by the local authority and WWW were bang on in calling for the independant inspector. The GRA/Risk/Galliard have no interest in investing in the long term future of greyhound racing. Why because the GRA incurred a massive debt on their borrowing (50 million) some years ago. The GRA once owned 15 stadiums that have gradually been pared down to service this debt. Venture capitalists jumped in and dealt with Galliard...a no brainer as the money is in development and houses. I believe RBS had the debt that was transferred to NAMA who want their money. Small greyhound track operators make money and the sport is still viable properly managed. Hall Green, Perry Bar and Belle Vue now leased by the GRA from Galliard (no longer owned) are rammed at the weekends and are viable but not enough for service the debt. There is minimal investment now in these tracks that is why the current Wimbledon Stadium is poor. Galliard and Nama want it for housing. Why do they want a football stadium paying nothing toward the land they own? The GRA over leveraged and got hit by two recessions. Current AFC fans should remove the rose tint and see the lesson in this.bishbosh

Apparently a football stadium and the supposed income that will bring (I'm not convinced) will be the most profitable so any other proposal looks dead in the water.
AFC Wimbledon should be ashamed of having a part in the demise of another sport in London.

Apparently a football stadium and the supposed income that will bring (I'm not convinced) will be the most profitable so any other proposal looks dead in the water.
AFC Wimbledon should be ashamed of having a part in the demise of another sport in London.Ilusions

wiggle96 wrote:
I cannot see the more jobs part as a football stadium would get less use than the current Stock car/Greyhound stadium gets so how would there be more jobs for the community ?

A shared ground for football, greyhounds and stock cars would have been the best outcome if there had to be one. Considering the whole point in redevelopment is intesification of sport, surely this would have ticked all the boxes and met all needs. Stock car and greyhound fans respectively are battling an ideology as much as anything else. That and greed.

[quote][p][bold]wiggle96[/bold] wrote:
I cannot see the more jobs part as a football stadium would get less use than the current Stock car/Greyhound stadium gets so how would there be more jobs for the community ?[/p][/quote]A shared ground for football, greyhounds and stock cars would have been the best outcome if there had to be one. Considering the whole point in redevelopment is intesification of sport, surely this would have ticked all the boxes and met all needs. Stock car and greyhound fans respectively are battling an ideology as much as anything else. That and greed.Ilusions

Apparently profesional football clubs do not want greyhound tracks around the pitch as it detracts from the atmosphere. I guess 4000 fans inside a 11000 stadium adds to the atmosphere. How can the financial case for football be viable?. The have to borrow from the banks and from fans to build it on land they will never own. You can talk all you like about covernents
and favourable leases. What happens when it goes bust?

Apparently profesional football clubs do not want greyhound tracks around the pitch as it detracts from the atmosphere. I guess 4000 fans inside a 11000 stadium adds to the atmosphere. How can the financial case for football be viable?. The have to borrow from the banks and from fans to build it on land they will never own. You can talk all you like about covernents
and favourable leases. What happens when it goes bust?bishbosh

Look what Merton council did with the last covenant on the real Plough Lane.
The developer probably couldn't care less that the actual business case by afc is potentially flawed. Even if it did bust the football club, the developer will still have money from the housing they build and no doubt go after any money owed from the lease etc or when it can't be paid they as the landowner will be able to find an alternative user. They can't really lose can they while the football club seem to be taking all the risks all pinned on getting enough people through the gate.

Look what Merton council did with the last covenant on the real Plough Lane.
The developer probably couldn't care less that the actual business case by afc is potentially flawed. Even if it did bust the football club, the developer will still have money from the housing they build and no doubt go after any money owed from the lease etc or when it can't be paid they as the landowner will be able to find an alternative user. They can't really lose can they while the football club seem to be taking all the risks all pinned on getting enough people through the gate.Ilusions

Last nights gate figure was 3,730 ,that crowd would look a bit lost in a new stadium that could hold 11,000. Cannot see after wages, tax, and cost of powering floodlights etc. there would be much left towards the costs of this new stadium.

Last nights gate figure was 3,730 ,that crowd would look a bit lost in a new stadium that could hold 11,000. Cannot see after wages, tax, and cost of powering floodlights etc. there would be much left towards the costs of this new stadium.wiggle96

The AFC manager went public to say he could not afford to bring in any more players he needs. " Basically we have run of of cash". What makes the dreamers at AFC believe borrowing 20 million is going to make them solvent and a going concern. Its a massive gamble for anyone lending them the money, including fans.

The AFC manager went public to say he could not afford to bring in any more players he needs. " Basically we have run of of cash". What makes the dreamers at AFC believe borrowing 20 million is going to make them solvent and a going concern. Its a massive gamble for anyone lending them the money, including fans.bishbosh

palmtree55 wrote:
I am a Merton resident, and I support the football stadium proposal. This will by far make best use of the site. The people running the Greyhound 'stadium' have shamefully allowed it to become rundown and a complete eyesore, why should they get another chance? Why do the greyhounds even have to be in Wimbledon....what do they bring to the community? AFC Wimbledon have won Government awards for their community work in Merton despite being in Kingston. Absolute no brainer.

The current owners GRA/Risk/Galliard have no interest in the long term future of their stadia. Housing is the name of the game to pare down a massive debt incurred years ago when the then owners GRA over leveraged. The stadium is deliberately starved of investment to help with a planning change of use. Over leveraging is something many smaller football clubs do chasing a dream. Building just a football stadium does not meet the needs of the local community. I thought the site was up for sport intensification. A multi use stadium is the best way forward. It wont happen as Galliard need every sq metre to build flats on.

[quote][p][bold]palmtree55[/bold] wrote:
I am a Merton resident, and I support the football stadium proposal. This will by far make best use of the site. The people running the Greyhound 'stadium' have shamefully allowed it to become rundown and a complete eyesore, why should they get another chance? Why do the greyhounds even have to be in Wimbledon....what do they bring to the community? AFC Wimbledon have won Government awards for their community work in Merton despite being in Kingston. Absolute no brainer.[/p][/quote]The current owners GRA/Risk/Galliard have no interest in the long term future of their stadia. Housing is the name of the game to pare down a massive debt incurred years ago when the then owners GRA over leveraged. The stadium is deliberately starved of investment to help with a planning change of use. Over leveraging is something many smaller football clubs do chasing a dream. Building just a football stadium does not meet the needs of the local community. I thought the site was up for sport intensification. A multi use stadium is the best way forward. It wont happen as Galliard need every sq metre to build flats on.bishbosh

bishbosh wrote:
The AFC manager went public to say he could not afford to bring in any more players he needs. &quot; Basically we have run of of cash". What makes the dreamers at AFC believe borrowing 20 million is going to make them solvent and a going concern. Its a massive gamble for anyone lending them the money, including fans.

Who's borrowing 20 million?

[quote][p][bold]bishbosh[/bold] wrote:
The AFC manager went public to say he could not afford to bring in any more players he needs. " Basically we have run of of cash". What makes the dreamers at AFC believe borrowing 20 million is going to make them solvent and a going concern. Its a massive gamble for anyone lending them the money, including fans.[/p][/quote]Who's borrowing 20 million?yojimbo

wiggle96 wrote:
Last nights gate figure was 3,730 ,that crowd would look a bit lost in a new stadium that could hold 11,000. Cannot see after wages, tax, and cost of powering floodlights etc. there would be much left towards the costs of this new stadium.

yeah lights are so much more expensive in a stadium with 11K. arguing over costs now. Hartlepool (long distance) on a cold wet tuesday night in league 2 when Liverpool Everton are on the box, that figure is good in that league and fair play to the 250 Hartlepool supporters who trekked down. Again I think all seats in the comfortable stands sold out. What the stadium lacks at the mo is the room for any casual supporters who turn up on the day for larger games or it's a 'nice saturday treat' . Our accounts show we have run in the black and been successful climbing the league since 2002 what makes you think we cannot do this in a bigger stadium, blimey we started on a park, now ook. Our model is positive and based on surveys and evidence of who our tickets are sold to. Your negativity is misplaced.

[quote][p][bold]wiggle96[/bold] wrote:
Last nights gate figure was 3,730 ,that crowd would look a bit lost in a new stadium that could hold 11,000. Cannot see after wages, tax, and cost of powering floodlights etc. there would be much left towards the costs of this new stadium.[/p][/quote]yeah lights are so much more expensive in a stadium with 11K. arguing over costs now. Hartlepool (long distance) on a cold wet tuesday night in league 2 when Liverpool Everton are on the box, that figure is good in that league and fair play to the 250 Hartlepool supporters who trekked down. Again I think all seats in the comfortable stands sold out. What the stadium lacks at the mo is the room for any casual supporters who turn up on the day for larger games or it's a 'nice saturday treat' . Our accounts show we have run in the black and been successful climbing the league since 2002 what makes you think we cannot do this in a bigger stadium, blimey we started on a park, now ook. Our model is positive and based on surveys and evidence of who our tickets are sold to. Your negativity is misplaced.yojimbo

Chuckie715 wrote:
Upton park will be up for grabs soon ready made stadium more than 11000 why dont afc put a bid in for there instead and leave the track there

Galliard need AFC and AFC need Galliard. How much are AFC expecting in naming rights for a third tier football club.?

[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
Upton park will be up for grabs soon ready made stadium more than 11000 why dont afc put a bid in for there instead and leave the track there[/p][/quote]Galliard need AFC and AFC need Galliard. How much are AFC expecting in naming rights for a third tier football club.?bishbosh

Chuckie715 wrote:
Upton park will be up for grabs soon ready made stadium more than 11000 why dont afc put a bid in for there instead and leave the track there

Galliard need AFC and AFC need Galliard. How much are AFC expecting in naming rights for a third tier football club.?

I think around £85 million but sure we won't get that, we are actually a fourth tier club so think the figure will be a bit lower. Joking aside, as I've mentioned it's just one of the avenues we have been looking at, our supporter base is very knowledgeable, keen and very savvy as we have proved over the last 11 years, and know we wouldn't be entering into this with a massive mortgage which we couldn't maintain. I must say I'm a bit fed up responding to the same questions, we as a support who literally know the accounts of the club as owners, know how much we can afford and how much we can spend. Has the same been said for the other sports there even at present, who subsidises the lease of the stadium. I can' imagine there are 5,000 volunteers ready to make the dog stadium work, yes Pascal has mooted a move there but he is a developer the same type of people that owned and ruined our club before. i just have not seen proof that your bodies think they can afford it (rightly or wrongly) instead of sniping at us prove to me both sports have the legs to build a new stadium. Anyway I've already answered questions politely, when no one has explained why the bodies that represent their sports haven't put viable bids in? Should Wimbledon football club back down and let the property developers let them build housing? Or should AFC wimbledon who (apparently can't afford to build their own ground) put the money up for them a) for the extra land to include dogs, bangers? and b) the different type of stadium. We can go back and forth but we fill our current ground, we predict we could have a crowd that fills our stadium in the present tier a number of times a season if it was 11K, .

[quote][p][bold]bishbosh[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chuckie715[/bold] wrote:
Upton park will be up for grabs soon ready made stadium more than 11000 why dont afc put a bid in for there instead and leave the track there[/p][/quote]Galliard need AFC and AFC need Galliard. How much are AFC expecting in naming rights for a third tier football club.?[/p][/quote]I think around £85 million but sure we won't get that, we are actually a fourth tier club so think the figure will be a bit lower. Joking aside, as I've mentioned it's just one of the avenues we have been looking at, our supporter base is very knowledgeable, keen and very savvy as we have proved over the last 11 years, and know we wouldn't be entering into this with a massive mortgage which we couldn't maintain. I must say I'm a bit fed up responding to the same questions, we as a support who literally know the accounts of the club as owners, know how much we can afford and how much we can spend. Has the same been said for the other sports there even at present, who subsidises the lease of the stadium. I can' imagine there are 5,000 volunteers ready to make the dog stadium work, yes Pascal has mooted a move there but he is a developer the same type of people that owned and ruined our club before. i just have not seen proof that your bodies think they can afford it (rightly or wrongly) instead of sniping at us prove to me both sports have the legs to build a new stadium. Anyway I've already answered questions politely, when no one has explained why the bodies that represent their sports haven't put viable bids in? Should Wimbledon football club back down and let the property developers let them build housing? Or should AFC wimbledon who (apparently can't afford to build their own ground) put the money up for them a) for the extra land to include dogs, bangers? and b) the different type of stadium. We can go back and forth but we fill our current ground, we predict we could have a crowd that fills our stadium in the present tier a number of times a season if it was 11K, .yojimbo

I don't think afc fans are being very realistic over the funding regardless of what they think about the other proposal for the stadium. Take a look at the clubs last accounts which are available here:

I stand to be corrected but from what I understand the club/fans only raised just over £1 million in a share issue for purchasing the lease at Kingsmeadow and took a £3 million loan out for the rest which I believe is not repaid yet.
If you struggled that much with a relatively small amount in comparison to what would be required for Plough Lane (£16 million conservative estimate) how do you genuinely believe you can do this and still run a successful football club?
I'd also like to know why when you have a perfectly functioning and larger capacity stadium which will be empty in the not too distant future (West Ham) you don't seem to be interested in that as a home? It can't be on geographical grounds because Plough Lane is not even in Wimbledon is it...

I don't think afc fans are being very realistic over the funding regardless of what they think about the other proposal for the stadium. Take a look at the clubs last accounts which are available here:
http://www.afcwimble
don.co.uk/documents/
afcw-plc-statutory-a
ccounts184-1169296.p
df
I stand to be corrected but from what I understand the club/fans only raised just over £1 million in a share issue for purchasing the lease at Kingsmeadow and took a £3 million loan out for the rest which I believe is not repaid yet.
If you struggled that much with a relatively small amount in comparison to what would be required for Plough Lane (£16 million conservative estimate) how do you genuinely believe you can do this and still run a successful football club?
I'd also like to know why when you have a perfectly functioning and larger capacity stadium which will be empty in the not too distant future (West Ham) you don't seem to be interested in that as a home? It can't be on geographical grounds because Plough Lane is not even in Wimbledon is it...Ilusions

Ilusions wrote:
I don't think afc fans are being very realistic over the funding regardless of what they think about the other proposal for the stadium. Take a look at the clubs last accounts which are available here:

http://www.afcwimble

don.co.uk/documents/

afcw-plc-statutory-a

ccounts184-1169296.p

df

I stand to be corrected but from what I understand the club/fans only raised just over £1 million in a share issue for purchasing the lease at Kingsmeadow and took a £3 million loan out for the rest which I believe is not repaid yet.
If you struggled that much with a relatively small amount in comparison to what would be required for Plough Lane (£16 million conservative estimate) how do you genuinely believe you can do this and still run a successful football club?
I'd also like to know why when you have a perfectly functioning and larger capacity stadium which will be empty in the not too distant future (West Ham) you don't seem to be interested in that as a home? It can't be on geographical grounds because Plough Lane is not even in Wimbledon is it...

Correct, we are servicing a mortgage on a piece of land/stadium we actually own, your point being? On paper that land is worth £3 million..not that we would sell it unless maybe a dog/banger/football bid came in ;) (joke) so a moot point. Sorry Illusions AGAIN who said we were borrowing £16 million? Loads of the same questions and still....no answer to mine, who's paying for a safe new dog/banger stadium? I will gladly exist in that environment as long as we are on Plough lane again but can dog/banger bodies do it, the council and Galliard are not paying for our build can GRA/Spedworth afford to chip in?

We have positive corporate people coming around...The new Plough Lane SEGA stadium anyone? Own the naming rights 15 years for 10 million bizarre but it happens. You guys are attacking AFC Wimbledon but the fact of the matter dog racing is declining, hence the lack of tracks in London. Galliard picked a sport and that sport isn't dogs or cars. I feel gutted for the cars but not so much for the dogs (personally i think it's cruel, only my opinion of course). Whoever wins the bid between Galliard and Pascal though, there will be no cars/bike racing either way, why is no one attacking Pascal?

[quote][p][bold]Ilusions[/bold] wrote:
I don't think afc fans are being very realistic over the funding regardless of what they think about the other proposal for the stadium. Take a look at the clubs last accounts which are available here:
http://www.afcwimble
don.co.uk/documents/
afcw-plc-statutory-a
ccounts184-1169296.p
df
I stand to be corrected but from what I understand the club/fans only raised just over £1 million in a share issue for purchasing the lease at Kingsmeadow and took a £3 million loan out for the rest which I believe is not repaid yet.
If you struggled that much with a relatively small amount in comparison to what would be required for Plough Lane (£16 million conservative estimate) how do you genuinely believe you can do this and still run a successful football club?
I'd also like to know why when you have a perfectly functioning and larger capacity stadium which will be empty in the not too distant future (West Ham) you don't seem to be interested in that as a home? It can't be on geographical grounds because Plough Lane is not even in Wimbledon is it...[/p][/quote]Correct, we are servicing a mortgage on a piece of land/stadium we actually own, your point being? On paper that land is worth £3 million..not that we would sell it unless maybe a dog/banger/football bid came in ;) (joke) so a moot point. Sorry Illusions AGAIN who said we were borrowing £16 million? Loads of the same questions and still....no answer to mine, who's paying for a safe new dog/banger stadium? I will gladly exist in that environment as long as we are on Plough lane again but can dog/banger bodies do it, the council and Galliard are not paying for our build can GRA/Spedworth afford to chip in?
We have positive corporate people coming around...The new Plough Lane SEGA stadium anyone? Own the naming rights 15 years for 10 million bizarre but it happens. You guys are attacking AFC Wimbledon but the fact of the matter dog racing is declining, hence the lack of tracks in London. Galliard picked a sport and that sport isn't dogs or cars. I feel gutted for the cars but not so much for the dogs (personally i think it's cruel, only my opinion of course). Whoever wins the bid between Galliard and Pascal though, there will be no cars/bike racing either way, why is no one attacking Pascal?yojimbo

bishbosh wrote:
The AFC manager went public to say he could not afford to bring in any more players he needs. &quot; Basically we have run of of cash". What makes the dreamers at AFC believe borrowing 20 million is going to make them solvent and a going concern. Its a massive gamble for anyone lending them the money, including fans.

[quote][p][bold]bishbosh[/bold] wrote:
The AFC manager went public to say he could not afford to bring in any more players he needs. " Basically we have run of of cash". What makes the dreamers at AFC believe borrowing 20 million is going to make them solvent and a going concern. Its a massive gamble for anyone lending them the money, including fans.[/p][/quote]oh we extended the loan for that player in the end, #tightrunship
thanks for worrying though.
http://www.afcwimble
don.co.uk/news/artic
le/wyke-signing-1331
240.aspxyojimbo

So how much are you expecting to have to raise then? My belief was that £16 million was quoted in the dons manifesto for a new stadium. If you lease your current ground you don't technically own the place do you, you just have it for so many years until it's up for renewal. What is your security for any potential loans?
I and other oval fans have explained why Bangers can't put up any opposition, we don't have the money to fight football or corporate interestes. How can we, we are are tiny compared to the forces behind football. As for Paschal Taggart, maybe he's seen the writing on the wall, especially when Merton Council have acted so unfairly and one sided throughout the whole process.
Iif historical significance is a major player in all this 'returning' to Plough Lane stuff, why don't afc take Merton Council and the house builders who demolished the old stadium to task over this? I'll ask again, what's wrong with Upton Park?

So how much are you expecting to have to raise then? My belief was that £16 million was quoted in the dons manifesto for a new stadium. If you lease your current ground you don't technically own the place do you, you just have it for so many years until it's up for renewal. What is your security for any potential loans?
I and other oval fans have explained why Bangers can't put up any opposition, we don't have the money to fight football or corporate interestes. How can we, we are are tiny compared to the forces behind football. As for Paschal Taggart, maybe he's seen the writing on the wall, especially when Merton Council have acted so unfairly and one sided throughout the whole process.
Iif historical significance is a major player in all this 'returning' to Plough Lane stuff, why don't afc take Merton Council and the house builders who demolished the old stadium to task over this? I'll ask again, what's wrong with Upton Park?Ilusions

You don't own it if you are leasing it do you. You have in a lease exclusive rights to it for so many years then it will be up for renewal. Therefore how is a stadium you don't own worth anything to you as security? The afc manifesto reads that £16 million is the amount needed initially. A loan was taken out for the current ground as you couldn't raise enough though fans. What makes you think anyone will put up millions for naming rights for a small club and why wasn't that done at Kingsmeadow instead of a huge loan if it was a viable option?
As for oval racing putting up opposition, I and others have explained why there is none officially. Lack of money to fight and the fact that Merton Council have been so vocal in supporting the football bid when they are supposed to be impartial. We are not stupid and know we have been sold out already, just like Wimbledon Fc were.
I'll ask again, what about Upton Park?

You don't own it if you are leasing it do you. You have in a lease exclusive rights to it for so many years then it will be up for renewal. Therefore how is a stadium you don't own worth anything to you as security? The afc manifesto reads that £16 million is the amount needed initially. A loan was taken out for the current ground as you couldn't raise enough though fans. What makes you think anyone will put up millions for naming rights for a small club and why wasn't that done at Kingsmeadow instead of a huge loan if it was a viable option?
As for oval racing putting up opposition, I and others have explained why there is none officially. Lack of money to fight and the fact that Merton Council have been so vocal in supporting the football bid when they are supposed to be impartial. We are not stupid and know we have been sold out already, just like Wimbledon Fc were.
I'll ask again, what about Upton Park?Ilusions